Skip to main content

Full text of "The creed of Deutschtum"

See other formats


Class  .Hi 


S)!^ 


Book      '  I  6  S 


CopiglitN 


JO 


COEXRIGHT  DEPOSm 


I' 


THE  CREED  OF  DEUTSCHTUM 


Books  by  Morton  Prince 


THE  NATURE  OF  MIND  AND 
HUMAN  AUTOMATISM 

THE    DISSOCIATION    OF  A 
PERSONALITY 


THE  UNCONSCIOUS 


THE  CREED 
OF  DEUTSCHTUM 


AND  OTHER  WAR  ESSAYS,  INCLUDING 

THE  PSYCHOLOGY  OF  THE  KAISER 

With  a  Foreword  by  MARQUIS  OKUMA 

(late  prime  minister  of  japan) 


BY 

MORTON  PRINCE 


BOSTON 

RICHARD   G.  BADGER 

THE   GORHAM   PRESS 


COPTRIGHT,  1918,  BY  RiCHARD  G.  BaDGER 


All  Rights  Reserved 


\'=> 
'^^ 


6 


6 


Made  in  the  United  States  of  America 


The  Gorham  Press,  Boston,  U.  S.  A. 

JUN  -3  |yi8 
.©GU497585 


iy   'i  .it$/V^ 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

CHAPTER                                                                                                           ,  _ 

I.  THE  CREED  OF  DEUTSCHTUM     ...  9 

II    PRUSSIAN  MILITARISM  AND  A  LASTING 

PEACE ^^ 

The  Demand  for  the  Suppression  of 

Prussian  Militarism 69 

What  Is  Prussian  Militarism?     ...  74 

Prussian  Militarism  in  Practice       .      .  78 
Peace   by   Negotiation   Impossible   at 

This  Time ^^ 

A  Conflict  Between  Two  Principles  of 

Government ^" 

III.  THE  PSYCHOLOGY  OF  THE  KAISER     .  103 

Foreword  by  Marquis  Okuma      ...  107 

Introduction  by  Professor  Shiosawa    .  Ill 

The  Kaiser's  Antipathy 11'7 

The  Kaiser's  Prerogatives     ....  131 

The  Kaiser's  Divine  Right  Delusion    .  134 

The  German  Autocracy  and  the  Army  142 

The  Kaiser's  Sentiments 145 

The    Kaiser's    Self-Regarding    Senti- 
ments       

Aims  of  the  German  Democracy  .      .     .  157 
The  Real  Cause  of  the  Kaiser's  Antip- 
athy   16^ 

The  Kaiser's  Antipathy  an  Obsession 

and  a  Defense  Reaction      ....  169 

The  Moral ^'^^ 


4  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

IV.  THE  AMERICAN  VERSUS  THE  GERMAN 

VIEWPOINT 175 

French   and   German  Lessons  at   the 

Front 175 

Songs  the  Germans  Sing      .      ...  177 

An  American  Viewpoint       ....  178 

Scores  Were  Shot  Down       ....  181 

Shot  to  Defend  Sister 182 

Attitude  of  German  Officers      .      .      .  187 

Why  Was  Louvain  Burned.'*      .      .      .  188 

General  von  Boehn's  View  ....  190 

Richard  Harding  Davis'  Views       .      .  192 

Awful  Price  Belgians  Paid   ....  193 

Other  Pictures  Drawn 195 

The  German  Ideal  of  Government       .  199 

The  German  Policy  of  Terrorism     .      .  201 

Proclamations  Threaten       ....  203 

The    Evidence    of    German    Soldiers' 

Diaries .  206 

The  American  Way  by  Contrast    .      .  208 

War  as  Taught  by  the  German  War 

Book 210 

The  Policy  of  Destroying  Merchant- 
men          212 

The  Prostitution  of  Intellectual  Hon- 
esty   214 

V.  THE   AMERICAN   CONSCIENCE,  1914-15  219 

VI.  THE  DISINTEGRATION  OF  AN  IDEAL  .  235 

The  Ideal 235 

The  Contrast 252 


CONTENTS  5 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

VII.  THE  WAR— A  TEST  OF  THE  GERMAN 

THEORY  OF  MILITARISM      ....     265 

VIII.  A  WORLD  CONSCIOUSNESS  AND  FUTURE 

PEACE 285 

The  Individual  Consciousness     .      ,      .     285 

Personality  as  Evolved  by  the  Creative 
Force  of  the  Experiences  of  Life       .     288 

The    Subconscious    as    the    Dynamic 
Source  of  Conduct 291 

The  Collective  Consciousness    .      .      .     293 

Types  of  Collective  Consciousness       .     294 

The  Development  of  a  Collective  Con- 
sciousness     294 

A  Common  Meaning  to  Ideals  Essential 
to  a  Collective  Consciousness      .      .     297 

The  Social  Consciousness  as  the  Regu- 
lator of  Society      .      .      ...      .      .     303 

A  World  Consciousness 308 


THE  CREED  OF  DEUTSCHTUM 


AN  ADDRESS  DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE  PHILADELPHIA 
MEDICAL  SOCIETY,  OCTOBER  19,  1917. 


THE  CREED  OF 
DEUTSCHTUM 


THE  thoughts  upon  this  great  war  and  the 
impressions  that  I  have  brought  back  from 
two  visits  to  the  battle  front,  have  not 
had  so  much  to  do  with  the  material  as- 
pects of  the  struggle — interesting  as  these  are — 
as  with  the  conflicting  ideals  for  which  the  war  is 
being  fought  on  each  side.  Let  me  premise  by 
saying  that  every  visitor  to  England  and  France 
and  to  the  western  battle  front  has  returned  im- 
pressed by  the  gigantic  scale  on  which  this  war  is 
being  waged  and  by  the  huge  military  and  indus- 
trial organizations  by  means  of  which  it  is  carried 
on.  Indeed  war  is  now  a  quasi  business,  organized 
on  a  colossal  scale,  employing  millions  of  workers 
as  well  as  soldiers  and  embracing  nearly  every 
sphere  of  human  activity. 

Leaving  aside  the  mobilization  of  the  factories, 
the  mines,  the  railroads  and  shipping,  the  food  sup- 
plies and  hundreds  of  industries  of  all  sorts,  the 
spectacle  at  the  front  of  the  vast  numbers  of  trans- 
port lorries,   the  hospitals  with  their  million  of 


10  The  Creed  of  Deutschturn 

beds,  the  commissariat  supplying  millions  of  men, 
the  air  service  with  its  thousands  of  flying  ma- 
chines, the  extraordinarily  developed  intelligence 
service  with  its  balloons  and  lookout  posts  besides 
its  special  aeroplanes  and  personnel;  the  telegraph 
and  telephone  service,  the  engineer  service  build- 
ing and  caring  for  the  railroads  and  motor  roads 
and  pipe  lines  for  water — the  spectacle  of  all  this 
and  much  besides  staggers  the  imagination. 

All  these  material  aspects  of  the  war  are  absorb- 
ingly instructive,  but  to  my  mind  the  most  impres- 
sive thing,  of  which  one  soon  becomes  aware,  is 
not  material.  It  is  the  spirit  of  France  and  Eng- 
land. It  is  the  national  consciousness  of  the  two 
nations.  It  is  the  unity  of  thought  and  common 
ideal  which  permeates  the  collective  consciousness 
of  the  peoples.  This  ideal  is  the  driving  force 
which  impels  them  to  go  on,  and  on,  and  on,  and 
make  no  peace  until  the  common  ideal  has  achieved 
its  end. 

You  have  noticed  that  every  squeal  for  peace  has 
come  out  of  Germany.  Every  day  we  hear  a  new 
squeal.  But  we  hear  not  a  sound  from  England  or 
from  France.  There  one  is  conscious  only  of  a  grim 
determination  to  go  on  until  the  final  object  is 
achieved.  That  object  is  something  over  and  be- 
yond the  restoration  of  territory,  and  even  beyond 
restitution  for  wanton  destruction;  and  beyond  in- 
demnities. 

Belgium  must  be  restored :    Yes. 

Serbia — Yes. 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  11 

Northern  France — Yes. 

Alsace-Lorraine — Yes,  if  possible. 

The  liberation  of  all  the  countries  now  overrun — 
Yes. 

All  this  as  a  matter  of  course.  But  all  this,  or 
most  of  it,  they  could  have  had  long  before  this  if 
they  had  been  content  with  going  back  to  the  status 
quo  ante. 

These  objects  omit  the  one  supreme  and  final 
aim  that  will  satisfy  the  aspirations  of  the  national 
consciousness  of  England  and  France.  This  aim 
is  a  lasting  peace,  and  therefore  the  attainment  of 
that  end  which  will  guarantee  a  lasting  peace.  This 
end  has  been  named  by  Lloyd  George  and  Asquith 
and  Bonar  Law  and  Balfour  and  all  the  leading 
statesmen  of  the  Allies  as  the  destruction  of  Prus- 
sian militarism. 

"Prussian  militarism"  is  a  convenient,  short  po- 
litical expression,  easily  understood  and  useful  as 
a  political  slogan.  But  it  is  far  from  being  accu- 
rate. It  is  far  from  representing  the  meaning  of 
the  real  thing  which  has  menaced  the  peace  and 
liberty  of  the  world  for  over  forty  years.  Prussian 
militarism  is  only  one  manifestation  of  that  thing, 
only  the  means  which  that  thing  employs  to  ac- 
complish its  purposes. 

The  real  thing  is  a  mystic  ideal  of  the  German 
people  called  Das  Deutschtum.f 

I  think  that  if  we  would  understand  France — if 
we  would  understand  what  France  fears,  and  what 

t  Sometimes  translated  "Germanism." 


12  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

England  fears;  what  gives  those  countries  the  for- 
titude to  go  on  and  refuse  to  make  peace  until  their 
supreme  object  is  attained,  we  must  grasp  the  full 
meaning  of  this  Thing. 

I  have  asked  many  responsible  people  in  France 
why  they  are  unwilling  to  make  peace,  and  their 
answer  has  always  been  the  same.  It  is  the  menace 
of  Das  Deutschtum;  not  formulated  in  that  term 
it  is  true,  but  in  the  facts  that  it  stands  for.  It  is  • 
thoroughly  realized  that  so  long  as  this  menace  per- 
sists there  can  be  no  lasting  peace. 

We  have  heard  a  great  deal  of  Prussian  militar- 
ism, and  of  the  military  oligarchy  and  of  the  Junk- 
er class,  and  they  alone  have  been  held  responsible 
for  this  war.  But  we  have  heard  little  in  the  sphere 
of  practical  politics  of  Deutschtum  (or  "German- 
ism") as  a  creed,  as  a  mystic  paranoid  ideal  which 
has  permeated  the  consciousness  of  a  whole  nation, 
and  we  have  heard  little  of  one  article  of  that  creed, 
the  so-called  Mission  of  the  German  people.  Few 
Americans,  probably,  have  grasped  what  the  Ger- 
mans mean  by  Deutschtum. 

I  do  not  mean  that  much  has  not  been  written 
on  the  subject.  On  the  contrary,  the  English  and 
French  war  literature  contains  numerous  brilliant 
essays  and  books  exhaustively  dealing  with  the  sub- 
ject; and  there  is  a  complete  literature  in  German 
which  has  been  the  source  from  which  most  of  our 
information  has  been  derived.  But  in  political  and 
war  speeches  and  the  responsible  statements  of  gov- 
ernment officials  little  reference  has  been  made  to 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  13 

these  dominating  ideals  of  the  German  people  which 
are  the  real  underlying  force  behind  Prussian  mili- 
tarism. As  they  are  the  dominating  ideals  of  the 
national  consciousness  of  Germany,  so  it  is  the  dom- 
inating ideal  of  the  national  consciousness  of  Eng- 
land and  of  France  to  destroy  them. 

We  must  keep  in  mind  that  Deutschtum  repre- 
sents the  common  ideals  not  only  of  the  ruling 
classes,  of  the  University  professors,  historians,  sci- 
entists, philosophers,  of  all  the  intellectuals,  but  of 
the  people  at  large.  And  it  is  the  force — a  very 
specific  and  impelling  force — which  has  urged  the 
German  people  and  nation  onward  in  their  mad 
drive  for  world  dominion,  and  for  this  purpose  to 
make  use  of  Prussian  militarism. 


II 


It  is  impossible  to  define  Deutschtum  in  a 
phrase.  The  word  is  untranslatable  excepting  per- 
haps by  ''Germandom/'  which  is  inadequate.  Das 
Deutschtum  is  the  national  consciousness  of  Ger- 
many so  far  as  it  pertains  to  conceptions  of  the 
state,  of  its  power  and  will,  of  the  character  and 
destiny  of  the  German  race,  and  to  the  aspirations 
and  political  creeds  of  the  j)eople.  It  also  involves 
an  ideal  of  duty  and  obligations  owed  to  the  state 
by  every  citizen  of  the  Empire.  Hence  it  has  been 
called  "a  state  of  mind."  It  is  a  system  of  ideals  of 
the  social  and  political  consciousness  of  the  people 


14  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

as  well  as  of  the  ruling  classes.  It  comes  well  nigh 
to  being  a  social  insanity. 

Deutschtum  or  Germandom,  then,  is  a  totality  of 
ideas  and  sentiments,  a  system  of  mental,  moral  and 
political  ideas  organized  about  two  closely  con- 
nected central  ideas,  that  of  the  state  and  that  of 
the  German  people  as  a  super-race,  superior  to  all 
others. 

In  this  system  there  have  become  evolved  and 
organized  a  number  of  sentiments  (including  na- 
tional policies )  which  have  been  postulated  as  ideals 
of  this  national  consciousness.  The  driving  force 
of  these  ideals  has  made  the  German  nation  what 
it  is  and  given  it  the  will  to  impose  its  dominion 
over  the  rest  of  the  world  and  use  whatever  methods 
it  saw  fit  regardless  of  the  opinions  of  the  rest  of 
mankind.  And  out  of  these  postulates  there  has 
developed  a  creed — a  creed  of  Deutschtum.  One 
may  say  that  Deutschtmn  as  a  whole  is  the  political 
creed  of  the  German  people,  which  like  the  Apos- 
tolic and  other  religious  creeds  embraces  a  series  of 
postulates.  But  each  postulate  dogmatically  ex- 
presses or  is  based  upon  the  lust  and  the  self-glori- 
fication of  the  German  people. 

Through  these  self-centred  ideals  Germany  has, 
like  a  paranoiac,  interpreted  other  nations,  other 
peoples,  and  its  own  relations  and  obligations  to 
them,  whether  in  the  domain  of  national  rights  and 
morals,  or  international  law  and  treaties. 

If  one  would  seek  the  origin  and  evolution  of 
Deutschtum  we  must  go  back  a  century  or  more  to 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  15 

the  times  of  Frederick  the  Great  and  the  immedi- 
ately post-Napoleonic  period.  For  all  students  of 
Germany  are  agreed  that  the  root  principles  and 
philosophy  of  Deutschtum  date  hack  to  the  philos- 
ophers Hegel  and  Kant  and  Fichte,  whose  teach- 
ings have  impregnated  German  thought — not  only 
that  of  the  so-called  intellectuals,  but  of  captains  of 
industry,  statesmen  and  even  military  writers. 

But  it  is  enough  for  us  to  take  German  thought  as 
of  the  present  day  just  as  we  find  it.  And  as  finally 
evolved  all  are  equally  agreed  that  German  ideals, 
political,  moral  and  military,  as  manifested  by  this 
war,  are  due  to  the  force  of  the  teachings,  in  the 
first  place,  of  the  political  historian  Treitschke  and 
the  unbalanced  philosopher  Nietzsche;  :j:  and  in  the 
second  place  to  the  writings  and  preachings  of  a 
perfect  swarm  of  university  professors  and  other 
intellectuals  who,  as  propagandists,  have  deluged 
the  German  people  with  their  elaborations  and  sec- 
ondary rationalizations  of  their  masters'  teachings. 
A  philosophy  runs  through  all  this  mass  of  thoughf , 
and  it  is  a  fact,  that  needs  to  be  considered,  that 
in  no  country  has  philosophy  so  permeated  and  de- 
termined the  thought  of  the  people,  other  than  the 
professional  philosophers,  and  the  national  con- 
sciousness as  in  Germany.  That  seems  incredible 
to  us  practical  Americans. 

It  will  also  seem  incredible  to  many  who  do  not 
know  Germany  that  the  scholastic  classes — univer- 
sity professors  and  professional  teachers  generally, 

t  He  finally  became  insane. 


16  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

should  have  such  an  influence  in  shaping  German 
thought  and  the  views  and  policies  of  government. 
But  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  German  sys- 
tem of  education  is  organized  to  that  end.  In  the 
first  place,  the  higher  schools  and  universities  are 
not  only  under  the  control  of  the  state,  but,  as  Pro- 
fessor Dewey,*  of  Columbia,  well  says,  are  a  part 
of  state  life,  and  the  state  takes  a  hand  in  the  selec- 
tion of  the  teachers  in  subjects  that  have  a  direct 
bearing  upon  political  policies. 

In  the  second  place  the  professors,  being 
appointees  of  the  state,  are  paid  henchmen  just  as 
much  as  are  the  appointees  of  Tammany  in  New 
York.  They  and  their  subordinates  have  got  to  shout 
for  the  state  and  its  apotheosis,  as  much  as  any  po- 
litical appointee,  or  off  goes  his  head,  or,  at  least, 
off  goes  any  chance  for  preferment  if  he  hopes  to  be 
a  professor.  And  in  the  third  place,  one  of  the  chief 
functions,  from  the  State's  point  of  view,  of  the 
universities  is  the  preparation  of  men  to  become  fu- 
ture state  officials,  members  of  the  bureaucracy. 
We  must  not  forget  that  the  legislative  body  plays 
little  part  in  the  German  government ;  it  is  hardly 
included  in  the  State  as  such.  The  State  is  the  Ad- 
ministration, responsible  to  the  Kaiser  alone;  and 
this  bureaucracy  practically  derives  its  membership 
from  the  universities.  University  teaching,  there- 
fore, shapes  the  thought  of  the  Administration,  the 
Kaiser,  the  State.  Its  philosophy  has  become  inbred 
in  the  state  ideals  and  the  national  consciousness. 

*  German  Philosophy  and  Politics. 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  17 

American  and  ]:Cnglish  professors  have  some  mod- 
esty in  inflicting  their  views  on  the  world  and  do 
not  consider  it  one  of  their  functions  to  instruct  the 
pubhc  on  pohtical  questions.  Indeed  the  public 
would  not  lend  a  very  serious  ear  to  their  views,  with 
the  exception  of  those  of  a  few  distinguished  repre- 
sentatives who  can  be  counted  almost  on  the  fingers 
of  the  two  hands.  But  in  Germany  the  case  is  quite 
different.  There  the  professors  and  their  tribe  have 
no  such  modesty.  Indeed  it  is  one  of  their  functions 
to  lecture  the  public  as  well  as  their  students,  and  the 
public  not  only  listens  but  looks  to  them  for  instruc- 
tion. The  professors  are  the  educators  of  Germany. 
And  this  is  true  not  only  of  the  university  men  but 
of  the  so-called  Intellectuals  generally.  The  con- 
sequence has  been  that  during  the  last  twenty  or 
thirty  years  a  host  of  such  men  have  produced  a  per- 
fect deluge  of  books  and  pamphlets  and  articles  on 
the  various  phases  of  Deutschtum.  They  have 
preached  and  hammered  into  the  ears  of  the  German 
people  the  doctrines  of  "Pan-Germanism," — "mor- 
ality of  war,"  and  "world  dominion"  and  "power," 
and  "the  sanctity  of  the  state"  and  the  "chosen  peo- 
ple" and  the  "Divine  mission  of  Germany"  and  all 
that  sort  of  thing.  Since  1897  this  has  been  partic- 
ularly resonant,  because  in  that  year  this  preaching 
and  hammering  was  organized  into  a  propaganda 
which  has  been  going  on  ever  since.  Two  organi- 
zations were  formed :  one  directed  by  the  professors 
with  a  publication  called  Der  Kampf  um  das 
Deutschtum  {The  struggle  for  Germandom) ;  the 


18  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

other,  called  the  Pan- Germanic  League^  with  a  pub- 
lication of  that  name,  directed  by  a  noisy  group  of 
men  who  inflamed  public  opinion  by  meetings, 
pamphlets,  and  articles.  This  latter  became  the 
Pan-Germanic  party. 

Among  various  other  Pan-German  organizations 
the  Deutsche s  Bund  was  formed  in  1894  with  two 
important  newspapers,  the  Deutsche  Tageszeitung 
and  the  Deutsche  Zeitung  as  organs.  Prince  von 
Billow,  former  Chancellor  of  the  Empire,  who 
dates  the  arrival  of  Germany  as  a  world  power 
from  1897,  has  given  much  credit  to  the  Pan-Ger- 
man League  for  its  success  in  "stimulating"  and 
"keeping  alive"  the  sentiments  taught  in  the  schools 
and  universities.  All  taught  the  various  doctrines 
of  Deutschtum  until  they  became  ingrained  in  the 
national  consciousness  of  Germany,  and  the  people 
became  puffed  up  with  self-glorification  and  came 
to  believe  they  were  the  "chosen  people"  and  had  a 
mission  to  extend  German  ideas,  German  kultur, 
German  dominion  over  the  face  of  the  earth;  and 
many  indeed  to  believe  that  they  were  called  upon 
by  God  to  regenerate  the  world.  The  result  has 
been  a  most  interesting  sociological  and  psychologi- 
cal phenomenon — a  quasi  social  insanity — a  sys- 
tematized herd  delusion  affecting  a  whole  people. 
And  the  Delusion  has  become  the  national  con- 
sciousness of  Germany. 

Unfortunately  the  rest  of  the  world  did  not  take 
all  this  as  seriously  as  should  have  been  done.  But 
since  the  war  began  attention  has  been  directed  to 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  19 

the  study  of  these  German  teachings  and  the  doc- 
trines of  Deutschtum.  They  have  been  collected  by 
English  and  French  writers  and  quoted  extensively 
in  many  books  and  pamphlets,  f 

After  the  first  shock  which  the  unsophisticated 
receives  they  make  dreary  reading,  for  they  are 
but  reiteration  and  reiteration  of  the  same  ideas  dif- 
fering only  in  the  degree  of  emotion  and  extrava- 

t  The  following  are  sufRcient:  Collection  de  Documents  sur  le 
Pangennanisme;  public  sous  le  direction  de  Mr.  Charles  Andler. 
(Les  Origines  du  Pangermanisme,  1800  k  1888;  Le  Pangermanisme 
Continental  sous  Guillaunie  II,  de  1888  a  1914.) 

Gems  (?)  of  German  Thought;  Compiled  by  William  Archer.  Dou- 
bleday.  Page  &  Co.,  1917.  (This  collection  contains  501  Gems,  ar- 
ranged by  subjects.  As  the  author  says,  it  could  easily  have  been 
made  1001  Gems.) 

German  Ideals  in  1917  and  in  1914;  W  Andre  Chevrillon.  (The 
author  discusses  briefly  the  ideals  with  quotations  from  and  refer- 
ences to  a  large  number  of  German  writers.) 

Out  of  Their  Own  Mouths  [compiled  by  Munroe  Smith].  D.  Apple- 
ton,  1917.  (A  large  collection  of  "utterances"  arranged  in  accord- 
ance with  the  vocations  of  the  writers — "German  Rulers,  Statesmen, 
Savants,  Publicists,  Dramatists,  Poets,  Businessmen,  Party  Leaders 
and  Soldiers. 

Juges  par  eux-mem.es ;  Paris.     Berger-Levrault,  1916. 

Das  annexiomstische  Deutschland;  "A  collection  of  documents  pub- 
lished or  circulated  since  August  4,  1914,  in  Germany";  by  S.  Grum- 
hach;  Paj'or  &  Co.,  Lausanne,  1917.  (Professor  Munroe  Smith  gives 
a  resume  of  these  in  a  review  in  The  Political  Science  Quarterly  for 
September,  1917.) 

The  Kaiser;  edited  by  Asa  Don  Dickenson,  1914  (contains  numerous 
classic  quotations  from  the  Kaiser's  utterances). 

The  Kainer's  Speeches;  Translated  and  edited  by  Wolf  von  Schier- 
brand,  &c.     Harper  &  Brothers,  1903. 

My  Ideas  and  Ideals.  Kaiser  Wilhelm  II.  Boston,  John  W.  Luce 
&  Co.    1914.     (A  collection  of  gems  from  the  Kaisei''s  utterances.) 

The  War  Lord;  by  J.  M.  Kennedy:  Duffield  &  Co.  1914  (Another 
collection  of  the  same). 

The  German  Emperor  as  Shown  in  His  Public  Utterances;  by 
Christian  Gault.    Charles  Scribner's  Sons.     1915. 


20  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

grance  of  delusion.  They  are,  however,  instructive 
and  every  American  should  read  them.  In  no  other 
way  can  one  obtain  an  insight  into  German  thought 
and  understand  Germany.  They  are  the  teachings 
of  professors,  and  scientists,  and  publicists,  and  in- 
dustrial magnates  and  ministers  of  the  Gospel,  and 
military  writers,  and  philosophers,  and  historians, 
and  public  men,  and  ethnologists,  and  travelers, 
and  journalists,  and  poets,  and  what  not.  No  won- 
der the  German  people  believe  in  Das  Deutschtum! 
Under  such  constant  hammering  the  thickest  skull 
would  be  penetrated  at  last. 

A  journalist  has  thus  sarcastically  but  accurately 
summed  up  this  propaganda  for  Das  Deutschtum: 

For  a  generation  before  the  war  modern  Germany  trav- 
estied Bismarck's  calculated  violence  while  incapable  of  his 
wisdom.  Every  sedentary  professor,  puffed  up  with 
swipes  and  imitation,  imagined  himself  to  be  a  son  of  iron 
and  a  potential  man  of  blood.  More  and  more  the  speech 
and  writing  of  the  whole  nation  became  heavy  with  pas- 
sionate words  and  menacing  metaphor.  Swords,  mailed 
fists,  and  hammers  jangled  in  this  clanking  vocabulary, 
but,  on  the  whole,  the  hammers  had  it.  The  poet's  word 
that  one  must  be  'either  hammer  or  anvil'  was  repeated 
like  a  creed.  Wagner,  the  race-worshipping  historians, 
the  two  kinds  of  Pan-Germans,  idealist  and  materialist, 
and  a  theatrical  Kaiser  in  a  helmet,  made  mythology  a 
worse  agent  of  delirium  than  alcohol. 

Ill 

I  have  no  intention  of  covering  again  this  dreary, 
if  shocking,  ground  of  German  Ideals";  I  want 
only  to  restate  one  or  two  of  their  postulates  which 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtuvi  21 

are  fundamental  and  from  which  as  premises  are 
derived  the  most  dangerous  dehision  in  the  Creed 
of  Deutschtum — dangerous  for  the  future  peace  of 
the  world.  These  postulates  are  the  I,  IV  and  IX 
articles  of  the  creed  which  itself  may  be  formulated 
without  doing  violence  to  the  claims  of  the  Ger- 
mans themselves  as  follows: 

Ten  Articles  of  the  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

I.  I  believe  in  the  apotheosis  of  the  State,  person- 
ified as  the  supreme  Will  and  idealized  as  Power, 
above  morality,  treaties  and  international  law; 
and  I  believe  a  State  when  without  physical  Power 
ceases  to  be  a  State  and  becomes  a  community 
without  rights. 
II.  I  believe  in  militarism  as  the  Pillar  of  the  State 
and  the  means  by  which  the  Will  and  Power 
of  the  State  shall  overcome  all  resistance  and 
rule  over  all  other  wills  and  extend  the  sover- 
eignty of  Germany  and  Germanism. 

III.  I  believe  that  war  is  sacred  and  moral;  and  that 
f rightfulness  is  a  justified  method  by  which  mil- 
itarism may  effect  the  aims  of  Germany  when 
resisted. 

IV.  I  believe  the  German  race  to  be  a  biologically  su- 
per-race and  the  Salt  of  the  Earth,  the  Chosen  of 
God. 
V.  I  believe  there  are  no  inherent,  inalienable  and 
natural  rights  of  mankind  which  the  State  is 
obliged  to  respect  and  which  are  reserved  to  the 
people  as  in  democracies. 

VI.  I  believe  it  to  be  the  duty  of  every  individual  to 
subordinate  his  will  to  the  will  of  the  State,  which 
is  above  the  will  of  private  and  public  opinion  and 
not  responsible  to  the  latter. 

And  I  believe  that  every  German  is  a  citizen- 
soldier   obligated  to  work  and  fight  in  his   own 


22  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

sphere  of  activity,  not  for  his  own  private  inter- 
ests but  for  German  greatness  and  to  propagate 
the  German  idea  throughout  the  world;  to  the 
end  that  Germany  may  in  every  way — pohtically, 
economically,  industrially,  intellectually  and  mili- 
tarily dominate  all  other  races  and  peoples. 
VII.  I  believe  that  Germany  has  a  mission  to  extend 
her  territories  and  power  at  the  expense  of  less 
meritorious  and  inferior  people — as  all  other  peo- 
ple are. 
VIII.  I  believe  the  German  State  collaborates  with 
God,  and  in  the  subjugation  of  weaker  people 
is  carrying  out  the  Will  of  God. 
IX.  I  believe  the  State  and  the  German  people  have 
a  mission  to  extend  German  kultur  and  German 
ideas  throughout  the  people  of  the  earth  and 
thus  regenerate  the  world. 
X.  I  believe  the  Western  ideas  of  Democracy,  Liber- 
ty and  Liberalism — the  "declarations  of  Rights" 
of  the  great  Western  nations  (particularly  the 
American  Declaration  of  1774  and  the  French 
Declaration  of  1789),  the  American  doctrine  of 
"inherent  and  inalienable  rights"  reserved  to  the 
people  and  which  no  government  can  take  away 
— are  antiquated,  effete  and  harmful;  I  believe 
the  present  war  is  a  conflict  between  German 
ideals  and  Western  Democratic  ideals ;  and  the 
new  Gospel  of  the  autocratic  German  State  is 
to  supersede  the  liberal  gospel  of  liberty  and  gov- 
ernment by  the  people  of  the  Western  Democ- 
racies. 

Some  of  these  articles  are  secondary  "rationaiiz- 
ings"  from  the  fundamental  ideals.  I  have  in 
mind  here  only  to  amplify  the  conception  of  the 
State  (I),  the  idea  of  the  Germans  being  a  super- 
race  (IV) ,  and  particularly  the  Mission  of  the  Ger- 
man people  (IX). 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  23 

Article  I.    The  German  Conception  of  the  State 

The  conception  of  the  State  as  Power,  and  hav- 
ing a  lot  of  other  metaphysical  attributes,  has  been 
repeated  over  and  over  again  in  parrot  fashion  so 
many  times  that  it  has  become  a  mystic  article  of 
faith.  Its  very  mysticism  lends  to  it  force  and  ease 
<jf  proselytizing,  as  is  the  case  with  a  religious  dog- 
ma, which  this  metaphysical  notion  of  State  has 
very  nearly  become.  The  phrase  formulated  by 
Treitschke  "The  State  is  Power"  has  become  a 
shibboleth.  The  idea  dates  back  to  Lasson,  who 
v/rote  in  1868,  and  perhaps  it  is  of  earlier  date  for 
all  I  know.  But  Treitschke  furnished  this  formula, 
which  tickles  the  ear.  It  is  made  up  of  words  which 
severally  have  meaning,  but  when  incorporated  in 
a  phrase  have  no  meaning  at  all.  One  might  as 
well  say  that  "a  civic  community  is  a  funded  debt" 
or,  "a  university  is  an  autocratic  will."  Yet  the 
formula  has  intoxicated  Germany  into  a  blind  wor- 
ship of  Power  and  the  creation  of  militarism  as  the 
pillar  on  which  that  power  shall  rest;  it  has  deluded 
them  into  elevating  might  above  everything  else  in 
the  world  and  inculcating  the  mystic  belief  that  in 
this  worship  of  Power  is  the  allegiance  owed  to  the 
State. 

Then,  amongst  its  other  attributes,  the  State  is 
an  entity,  a  mystic  personality;  it  is  the  Absolute; 
the  sovereign  in  everything — morals,  will,  and 
everything  else.  Some  extremists  would  even  en- 
dow it  with  Divinity,  "The  State  is  God  on  earth," 


24  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

as  Prof.  Dewey  of  Columbia  sums  up  the  doctrine 
of  Hegel  who  said,  "The  march  of  God  in  history 
is  the  cause  of  the  existence  of  States."  Indeed 
"history  is  the  movement,  the  march  of  God  on 
earth  through  time"  (Dewey).  Hence,  as  argued 
by  a  German,  to  surrender  any  territory  which  Ger- 
many has  conquered  in  the  present  war  would  be 
sacrilegious.  In  this  political  philosophy  Germany 
is  conceived,  as  Professor  Durkeim  has  phrased  it, 
as  the  highest  terrestrial  incarnation  of  divine 
power. 

These  attributes  are  of  practical  importance  be- 
cause, for  instance,  from  the  dogmas  of  the  sover- 
eignty of  the  will  and  in  morals  are  derived  the 
axioms  that  the  State  can  break  treaties  and  in- 
ternational law  when  it  wills,  and  that  in  war  as 
well  as  in  peace,  the  State  is  above  the  laws  of  mor- 
ality and  humanity,  which  only  apply  to  individ- 
uals. The  sovereignty  of  the  will  of  the  State  nec- 
essarily extends  to  public  opinion.  This  kind  of  a 
state,  conceived  of  as  a  mystic  personal  entity,  is 
not,  as  in  democracies,  the  expression  of  public 
opinion  but  something  apart  from  and  above  it.  It 
may  or  may  not,  as  it  pleases,  take  into  considera- 
tion the  will  of  the  people,  or  classes  of  the  people. 
Indeed  there  can  scarcely  be  a  will  of  the  people, 
for  absolute  obedience  to  the  will  of  the  State  is 
the  highest  duty  of  the  citizens.  There  is  perfect 
freedom  of  opinion,  but  the  duty  of  all  is  to  obey. 
This  has  a  different  significance  from  the  obliga- 
tion, in  democracies,  of  every  citizen  to  obey  the 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  2,5 

State.  For  in  Democracies  if  the  "State"  adopts 
methods,  or  pohcies,  or  morals,  or  behavior  disap- 
proved by  the  majority,  out  goes  the  "State,"  i.  e., 
the  administration,  bag  and  baggage.  Society  gov- 
erns. 

The  Kaiser  once  said,  "There  is  no  law  but  my 
law;  there  is  no  will  but  my  will,"  and  the  world 
outside  Germany  first  gasped  at  the  audacity,  and 
then  smiled  at  what  it  thought  personal,  swash- 
buckling, autocratic  arrogance.  But  in  reality  it 
was  only  this  German  conception  of  the  State,  for 
the  Kaiser  symbolized  the  State  in  his  person.  And, 
similarly,  his  saying,  "Considering  myself  as  the 
instrument  of  the  Lord,  and  without  heeding  the 
views  and  opinions  of  the  day,  I  ^o  my  way,"  was 
only  another  way  of  asserting,  in  accordance  with 
Articles  I,  V  and  VI  of  the  Creed,  that  the  will 
of  the  State  was  superior  to  that  of  society. 

This  dogma  that  the  State  is  power  justifies  the 
invasion  and  rape  of  Belgium,  because,  of  course 
as  logically  follows,  a  State  is  a  State  only  just  so 
far  as  it  has  power.  "A  so-called  small  state  is 
not  a  state  at  all,  but  only  a  tolerated  community 
which  absurdly  pretends  to  be  a  State."  .  .  .  "The 
lesser  states  have  rights  only  in  so  far  as  they  pos- 
sess a  power  of  resistance  that  must  be  taken  into 
account."    (Lasson.) 

One  ideal  which  has  been  of  wonderful  assistance 
to  the  German  Empire,  both  in  its  internal  de- 
velopment and  in  its  policy  of  dominating  other 
peoples,  has  logically  resulted  from  this  mystic  con- 


26  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

ception  of  the  State  and  the  duty  of  obedience  to 
the  will  of  the  State.  But  it  has  had  a  most  malign 
influence  upon  the  welfare  of  other  peoples.  It  is 
the  ideal  that  every  German,  on  the  one  hand,  should 
subordinate  his  private  interests  and  rights  to  the 
interests  of  the  State,  and,  on  the  other,  that  as  a 
citizen  soldier,  he  is  obligated  to  work  and  fight  in 
his  own  sphere  of  activity  to  further  the  ideals  and 
policies  and  aggressions  of  the  Fatherland — the 
ideals  of  Das  Deutschtum. 

This  ideal  has  been  taught  and  fostered  by  the 
State  in  the  school  and  university  until  it  has  be- 
come ingrained  in  the  personality  of  every  Ger- 
man. It  has  been  the  motivating  force  underlying 
the  German  propaganda  in  America  and  elsewhere, 
and  gives  the  real  insidious  meaning  to  the  notorious 
Delbriick  law  which  claims  a  continuing  allegiance 
to  the  Fatherland  of  every  German  naturalized  in 
a  foreign  country.  Mr.  Kuno  Francke,  who  until 
very  recently  was  Professor  at  Harvard  Univer- 
sity, has  borne  testimony  to  this  devotion  of  every 
German  to  the  national  conception  of  State  and 
the  obligations  that  it  entails.  I  shall  have  occasion 
to  quote  him  as  a  witness  in  several  connections, 
as  he  is  one  of  the  most  conservative  of  Americans 
of  German  birth  and  education  and  one  who  has 
won  the  respect  of  the  community  because  of  his 
refusal,  out  of  a  sense  of  duty  to  his  adopted  coun- 
try, to  join  at  the  outset  of  the  war  the  intriguing 
group  of  German  propagandists  in  this  country  of 
which  Miinsterberg  and  Dernberg  were  leaders. 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  27 

Professor  Francke,  however,  has  appealed,  some- 
what naively,  I  think,  for  American  approbation 
of  German  ideals  without  an  apparent  thought  that 
those  ideals  which  he  lavishly  extols  can  only  shock 
the  American  conscience.  However  that  may  be, 
his  testimony,  as  that  of  one  who  knows  his  Ger- 
many, is  of  value.  In  regard  to  the  solidarity  of 
German  sentiment  regarding  the  State  and  duties 
of  citizens  he  has  said: 

No  doubt  there  never  was  a  conception  of  the  state 
among  any  people  from  Avhich  this  moral  and  disciplinary 
view  was  entirely  absent.  But  not  since  Plato's  time  has 
this  view  anywhere  been  a  national  force  as  truly  vital 
and  all  embracing  as  it  has  come  to  be  in  modern  Prussia 
and  Germany.  It  has  imbued  the  whole  German  people, 
as  no  other  people  is  imbued,  with  the  spirit  of  national 
service  and  national  achievement.  The  modern  German 
mind  instinctively^  refuses  to  accept  any  of  the  thousand 
and  one  private  activities  that  constitute  the  daily  life 
of  a  people  as  something  really  private  and  isolated.  The 
farmer  and  the  miner,  the  factory  hand  and  the  sailor, 
the  business  man  and  the  preacher,  the  scholar  and  the 
artist — they  are  all  soldiers,  soldiers  for  German  great- 
ness and  progress ;  and  their  spheres  of  activity,  far  apart 
as  they  may  seem  from  cacli  other,  are  in  reality  on  one 
and  the  same  level,  t!ie  level  of  the  fight  for  making  Ger- 
many in  every  way,  politically,  economically,  intellec- 
tually, and  morally — a  self-supporting,  self-reljnng,  con- 
spicuously healthy  and  conspicuously  productive  national 
organism.* 

Professor  Francke,  it  is  true,  has  adroitly  nar- 
rowed the  conception  of  the  State  to  "preeminently 

*  "The  War— A  Test  of  the  German  Theory  of  the  State"  (The 
Problems  and  Lessons  of  the  War:  Clark  University  Addresses:  G.  P. 
Putnam's  Sons.    1916). 


28  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

a  moral  agency  superior  to  society,"  "its  principal 
mission"  being  "to  raise  the  individuals  that  make 
up  society  to  a  higher  level  of  public  consciousness 
and  energy."  But  the  German  "conception  of  the 
state"  is  too  well  known  to  be  concealed  by  this 
camouflage.  The  solidarity  of  sentiment  and  mob- 
ilization of  the  people  is  the  point. 

Article  IV.    The  Germans  a  Super-Race 

The  inrooted  belief  that  the  German  race  is  a 
super-race  is  a  cardinal  article  of  the  Deutschtum 
creed.  To  justify  this  belief  appeal  has  been  made 
to  a  mythical  biological  race-type  (to  which  it  is 
claimed  Germans  alone  belong) ;  to  heredity  and  an- 
thropology, to  history  and  legend,  supported  by  the 
achievements  of  the  much  vaunted  German  kultur. 
The  race-type  has  been  claimed  to  be  characterized 
by  blue  eyes  and  blond  hair  and  complexion ;  and  his- 
torians and  "race-biologists"  have  tried  to  show  that 
when  men  of  genius  have  appeared  in  other  nations 
they  were  blonds  and  had  blue  eyes  and  therefore 
were  descendants  of  the  German  race. 

Anthropologists  and  other  scientists  and  so-called 
"race-biologists"  like  Houston  Chamberlain,  have 
not  hesitated,  as  no  greater  biologist  than  Profes- 
sor Jacques  Loebf  of  the  Rockefeller  Institute  has, 
amongst  others,  pointed  out,  to  misrepresent  sci- 
entific principles  of  heredity  and  evolution  and  put 
forward  a  pseudo-science  by  which  they  have  ap- 

t  Biology  and  War;  Science,  Jan.  26,  1917. 


The  Creed  of  DeutscJitum  29 

pealed  to  the  vanity,  and  captivated  the  self-esteem 
of  the  people.  Running  through  Pan-Germanic 
literature  one  finds  this  idea  of  a  super-race  con- 
stantly and  frankly  stated,  or  connoted,  or  assumed. 
The  following  well  known  quotations  from  the 
utterances  of  important  people  from  the  Kaiser 
down  are  illustrative.  They  could  be  multiplied  a 
thousand  fold  ad  nauseam. 

We  are  the  salt  of  the  earth. 

We  are  the  chosen  people. 

Many  are  called  but  few  are  chosen. 

We  are  of  all  the  peoples,  the  most  noble,  the  most 
pure,  destined  before  others  to  work  for  the  highest 
development  of  humanity. 

Deutschland  is  above  everything,  above  everything  in 
the  world. 

We  are  indubitably  the  most  martial  nation  in  the 
world.  .  .  . 

We  are  the  most  gifted  of  nations  in  all  the  domains  of 
science  and  art.  We  are  the  best  colonists,  the  best 
sailors  and  even  the  best  traders. 

Germany  is  so  far  above  and  beyond  all  the  other 
nations  that  all  the  rest  of  the  earth,  be  they  who  they 
may,  should  feel  themselves  well  cared  for  when  they  are 
allowed  to  fight  with  the  dogs  for  the  crumbs  that  fall 
from  her  table. 

The  Teutons  are  the  aristocracy  of  Humanity. 

Whosoever  has  the  characteristics  of  the  Teuton  race 
is  superior  .  .  .  the  cultural  value  of  a  nation  is  measured 
by  the  quantity  of  Tcutonism  it  contains. 

Immoral,  of  course,  is  a  policy  of  power  if  it  is  em- 
ployed, as  amongst  our  enemies,  to  supplant  the  higher 
German  culture  and  morality  by  the  much  lower  English, 
French,  or  Russian  culture  (or  lack  of  cultui*e). 


30  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

The  Teutons  are  the  aristocracy  of  humanity;  the 
Latins,  on  the  contrary,  belong  to  the  degenerate  mob. 

The  German  people  is  always  right,  because  it  is  the 
German  people  and  numbers  87  million  souls. 

I  want  first  to  make  it  clear  in  what  sense  we  may  say, 
without  extravagance  or  the  least  trace  of  self -exaltation : 
Germany  is  chosen,  for  her  own  good  and  that  of  other 
nations,  to  undertake  their  guidance.  Providence  has 
placed  the  appointed  people,  at  the  appointed  moment, 
ready  for  the  appointed  task. 

Here  in  America  even  Prof.  Francke  has  sung 
the  same  swan  song : 

No  unprejudiced  observer  of  contemporary  Euro- 
pean affairs  can  get  away  from  the  fact  that  Germany 
during  the  last  fifty  years  has  excelled  all  other  coun- 
tries in  eagerness  and  momentum  of  private  initiative. 
The  German  schoolboy  is  more  eager  to  learn,  the  Ger- 
man university  student  is  more  firmly  set  upon  independ- 
ent research,  the  German  workman  has  a  higher  level  of 
average  intelligence,  the  German  farmer  is  more  scien- 
tific in  the  cultivation  of  his  soil,  the  German  manufac- 
turer is  more  ready  to  introduce  new  methods  of  produc- 
tion, the  German  business  man  is  more  active  in  finding 
new  outlets  for  his  goods,  the  German  city  administrator 
is  more  keenly  alive  to  civic  improvements,  the  German 
army  and  navy  officer  is  more  fully  abreast  with  every 
new  experiment  or  device  of  military  tactics,  all  Germans 
are  keyed  up  to  a  more  intense,  a  more  swiftly  pulsating 
manner  of  life  than  is  the  case  in  any  one  of  the  nations 
with  which  Germany  is  now  at  war.  All  this  intensity 
of  private  initiative,  I  believe,  is  largely  due  to  the  im- 
pelling force  exerted  upon  the  individual  by  the  exalted 
views  instinctively  held  by  all  Germans  regarding  the 
mission  and  the  functions  of  the  state.;]: 

t  Loc.  cit. 


The  Creed  of  Deutschturn  31 

Article  IX.     The  Holy  Mission  of  the  German 

People 

This  belief  in  race  and  kultur  superiority  would 
be  harmless  and  could  be  laughed  at  if  it  had  not 
led  to  calamitous  consequences.  From  this  belief 
as  one  premise,  and  the  mystic  conception  of  the 
State  embodied  in  and  taught  by  Das  Deutschtum 
as  another,  Germany  has  justified  and  stimulated 
her  lust  for  power  and  territory  by  the  conclusion 
that  it  is  the  mission  of  a  superior  race  to  extend 
itself  at  the  expense  of  inferior  races  over  the  rest 
of  the  world.  And,  therefore,  the  German  people 
have  this  mission  on  this  earth:  to  extend  Deutsch- 
tum over  all  other  peoples,  European,  American 
and  Asiatic,  to  regenerate  the  world  for  the  benefit 
of  humanity.  It  is  the  same  idea  that  the  white 
races  have,  or  have  had  as  to  their  duties  towards 
uncivilized  races — "the  white  man's  burden."  This 
is  the  principal  theme  to  which  I  wish  to  speak. 

However  grotesque  the  idea  may  appear,  or  how- 
ever much  of  a  moral  insanity  it  may  be  regarded, 
it  is  real — a  real,  vital,  impelling  force  and  must  be 
taken  seriously.  It  is,  indeed,  the  great  sociological 
obsessing  delusion  with  which,  to  state  it  conserva- 
tively, the  dominant  classes  of  Germany  have  be- 
come affected.     It  has  become  a  national  ideal. 

It  is  not  always  easy  in  analysing  a  psychologi- 
cal obsession  to  determine  the  basic  causal  root  ideas 
from  which  the  obsession  has  sprung.  As  a  iiile, 
every  obsession  has  its  roots  in  several  antecedent 


32  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

ideas  which  cooperate  in  the  final  mental  state,  and 
around  which  others  become  systematized  through 
processes  of  rationalizing.  Students  of  German- 
dom,  or  "Germanism,"  therefore,  differ  somewhat 
in  their  conclusions  on  this  point.  But  my  view 
would  be  that  the  main  psychological  roots  of  this 
obsession  are  to  be  found  in  the  two  premises  I 
have  mentioned.  But  systematized  with  them  in  the 
delusional  belief  and  as  cooperative  ideas,  reached 
by  the  process  of  rationalization  are  the  doctrines 
of  so-called  Prussian  militarism,  the  sanctity  of  war 
and  the  justification  of  f rightfulness  as  necessary 
methods. 

In  the  light  of  this  German  state  of  mind  with 
all  its  obsessing  ideas,  and  in  the  light  of  German 
world-wide  activities  and  propagandism,  the  idea 
''Deutschland  ilber  Alles"  so  widely  popularized  in 
song  and  speech,  acquires  a  deeper  and  wider  mean- 
ing than  military  and  economic  sovereignty,  or  po- 
litical sovereignty  over  Mittel-Europa  and  other 
territories  belonging  to  other  people.  It  means  in 
addition  that  the  German  State  is  above  all  other 
states,  above  international  law,  above  morality, 
above  civil  society,  above  all  private  rights,  above 
public  opinion;  and  its  will  is  above  the  will  of 
all  individuals  (singly  or  collectively)  whose  duty 
is  to  obey.  And  it  means  that  German  ideas,  Ger- 
man Kultur,  and  everything  that  the  German  idea 
stands  for — world-power,  world-markets,  world- 
kultur  ("Weltmacht,  Weltmarht,  Welthultur')  — 
is  to  be  extended  throughout  the  world.  As  Prince 


The  Creed  of  Detttschtum  33 

von  Billow  said,  "Germany  above  everything,  ev- 
erything in  the  world."  In  this  Deutschtum  is 
summed  up. 

This  idea  of  a  world  mission  is  a  very  old  one, 
and  has  agitated  German  thought  for  a  century  at 
least.  At  the  commencement  of  the  last  century 
the  philosopher  Fichte  taught  that  "the  Germans, 
of  all  the  modern  nations,  had  received  in  special 
measure  into  their  safekeeping  the  seeds  of  human 
perfection,"  and  that  it  had  been  entrusted  to  them 
to  take  the  leading  part  in  their  development  in 
the  great  confederation  of  a  new  humanity.  "Since 
then,"  as  Lavisse  and  Andler  remark,  "that  mag- 
nificent and  mystic  declaration  of  haughty  pride 
has  been  repeated  a  hundred  times."*  These  au- 
thors go  on  to  point  out  that  Heinrich  Heine  in 
his  time  had  announced  that  "Not  only  Alsace  and 
Lorraine,  but  the  whole  of  France  and  Europe, 
and  the  world  itself  will  find  salvation  and  become 
ours.  Yes,  the  whole  world  shall  be  German.  I 
have  often  dreamed  of  that  mission  of  the  univer- 
sal domination  of  Germany  when  I  was  walking 
in  my  reveries  under  the  evergreen  pines  of  my 
fatherland." 

A  few  quotations  from  more  recent  writers — 
which  I  take  from  various  collections  and  other 
writings — will  suffice  to  present  the  point  of  view: 

He   who   does    not    believe   in   the   Divine   mission    of 
Germany   had   better   hang   himself,    and    rather   to-day 
than  to-morrow. — H.  S.  Chamberlain. 
*  German  Theory  and  Practice  of  War. 


34  The  Creed  of  DeutscTitum 

We  are  indeed  entrusted  here  on  earth  with  a 
doubly  sacred  mission:  not  only  to  protect  Kultur  .  .  . 
against  the  narrow-hearted  huckster-spirit  of  a  thor- 
oughly corrupted  and  inwardly  rotten  commercialism 
(Jobbertum),  but  also  to  impart  Kultur  in  its  most  au- 
gust purity,  nobility  and  glory  to  the  whole  of  humanity, 
and  thereby  contribute  not  a  little  to  its  salvation.  Ein 
Deut seller:  Was  uns  der  Krieg  bringen  muss. 

Germany  is  the  future  of  humanity — Pastor  W.  Leh- 
mann. 

God  defend  the  noble  cause  of  Deutschtum.  There  is 
no  other  hope  for  the  future  of  humanity. — H.  S.  Cham- 
berlain, 1914. 

We  must  vanquish,  because  the  downfall  of  German- 
ism would  mean  the  downfall  of  humanity. — Pastor  K. 
Konig. 

The  German  people  must  rise  as  a  master-folk  above 
the  inferior  peoples  of  the  colonies. — Grossdeutschland 
und  Mitteleuropa  um  das  Jalir  1950,  von  einem  Alldeuts- 
cJien,  1895. 

A  great  mission,  scarcely  comprehensible  to  other  na- 
tions, is  unquestionably  reserved  for  the  whole  German 
character  {Anlage)  [which  is  defined  as]  the  spirit  of 
pure  humanity  [and  the  mission  as]  the  ennoblement 
of  the  world. — Richard  Wagner. 

We  hope  that  a  great  mission  will  be  allotted  to  us 
Germans  .  .  .  and  this  German  mission  is :  to  look  after 
the  world  {zu  sorgen  filr  die  Welt).  Is  it  arrogance  to 
write  such  a  phrase?  Is  it  vanity  in  the  disguise  of 
a  moral  idea?  No,  no,  and  again  no. — Pastor  G. 
Traube,  1914. 

It  is  my  firm  belief  that  the  country  to  which  God 
gave  Luther,  Goethe,  Bach,  Wagner,  Moltke,  Bismarck 
and  William  I.  has  still  a  great  mission  before  it,  to 
work  for  the  welfare  of  humanity.  God  has  put  us 
to  a  hard  probation  .  .  .  that  we  may  the  better  serve 
as  His  instrument  for  the  saving  of  mankind;  for  we 
were  on  the  point  of  becoming  untrue  to  our  old-estab- 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtuin  35 

lished  nature  (Wesen).  He  who  has  imposed  upon  us 
this  ordeal  will  also  help  us  out  of  it. — Extract  from 
letter  of  an  important  personage,  but  unnamed,  to  H.  S. 
Chamberlain. 

God  has  in  Luther  practically  chosen  the  German  peo- 
ple, and  that  can  never  be  altered,  for  is  it  not  written 
in  Romans  XI,  29,  "For  the  gifts  and  calling  of  God 
are  without  repentance." — Dr.  Preuss. 

We  have  entered  into  the  war  with  hearts  high  and 
pure,  permeated  with  the  aspirations  of  our  national  fu- 
ture. That  future  we  will  fill  with  the  blossoms  of  our 
culture;  it  is  assured  to  us  by  the  desire  that  inspires 
and  unites  all  Germans  to  raise  the  world  to  full  noble- 
ness and  perfection. — Historian  Lamprecht. 

Papacy  and  Empire  are  both  Teutonic  organizations 
for  domination,  meant  to  subjugate  the  world.  The  Teu- 
tonic race  is  called  to  circle  the  earth  with  its  rule, 
to  exploit  the  treasures  of  nature  and  of  human  labor 
power,  and  to  make  the  passive  races  servient  elements 
in  its  cultural  development. — Ludwig  Woltmann. 

The  poet  Wolf  skehl  declares : 

To-day  the  question  is  that  of  the  life  or  death  of 
European  culture.  Your  accomplices  sin  against  the 
Holy  Ghost  of  Europe.  We  make  this  war  for  all  the 
humanity  of  Europe.  This  war  comes  from  God.  The 
divine  clement  in  humanity  is  at  stake. 

Professor  Mahling  announced : 

The  hour  of  the  world-mission  of  the  German  people 
had  struck.  .  .  .  Do  we  desire  to  be  the  hammer  which 
God  wields.'' 

And  thus  we  might  go  on  quoting  tediously  and 
almost  indefinitely  from  German  writers  upholding 
the  mission  of  Germany  in  one  or  other  of  its 
aspects. 

And  so  there  has  developed  this  most  dangerous 


36  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

of  the  ideals  of  Das  Deutschtum  which  postulates 
the  Mission  (sometimes  called  "divine"  and  "holy") 
of  Germany  to  expand  and  regenerate  the  world 
according  to  German  ideas  for  the  benefit  of  hu- 
manity. It  is  not  difficult  to  understand  that  some 
extremists,  holding  that  the  State  itself  is  divine, 
or  derives  its  power  from  God,  or  is  the  instrument 
of  God,  or  collaborator  with  God,  believe  that  this 
mission  is  a  Holy  Mission;  and  that  the  "chosen 
people"  are  called  "to  live  and  expand  at  the  ex- 
pense of  other  less  meritorious  people."  In  other 
words,  as  one  American  writer,  Arthur  Bullard, 
phrases  it,  the  Germans  believe  they  have  been 
called  of  God  to  regenerate  the  world.  Hence 
"Deutschtum  is  a  crusade" — a  political  religion. 

How  widely  the  notion  of  a  holy  authority  for 
this  mission  obtains  there  is  no  means  of  knowing. 
But  considering  the  mystic  elevation  of  the  state, 
the  almost  universality  of  the  belief  that  every  Ger- 
man is  obligated  to  work  for  the  power  and  domin- 
ion of  the  state;  that  his  highest  duty  is  his  duty 
to  the  state,  subordinating  all  private  rights  and 
interests  to  that  end,  that  the  spread  of  Germanism 
would  be  for  the  glory  and  power  and  advantage 
of  the  state  and  the  greatest  good  of  humanity,  the 
spiritual  force  of  this  mission  is  almost  as  great 
under  the  authority  of  the  State  as  if  it  were  uni- 
versally felt  to  be  one  ordained  by  God  as  many 
really  do  insist. 

The  notion  of  collaboration  with  God  crops  out 
in  nearly  every  speech,  order  or  proclamation  the 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  37 

Kaiser  makes,  and  takes  on  a  fuller  meaning  when 
the  national  ideal  of  a  mission  is  kept  in  mind. 
When  we  also  bear  in  mind  that  the  regeneration 
of  the  world,  which  the  mission  of  Deutschtum 
would  bring  about,  intends,  the  supplanting  of  the 
ideals  of  the  Eastern  and  the  Western  world  with 
the  German  ideals  of  the  elevation  of  the  state  above 
all  moral  laws  and  international  law,  of  the  deifica- 
tion of  Force,  the  deification  of  War  as  holy,  the 
sacred  duty  of  violating  treaties,  the  obligation  to 
use  Frightfulness,  and  so  on,  we  realize  the  danger 
to  lasting  peace  from  this  ideal  of  Deutschtum 
which  is  the  inspiring  force  of  the  German  nation. 


IV 


Notwithstanding  all  the  extensive  literature  of 
Deutschtum,  the  thoughtful  reader  will  ask  himself 
to  what  extent  its  ideals  have  permeated  the 
masses  as  well  as  the  classes  of  the  German  people. 
It  is  very  easy  to  overwork  a  fact  as  well  as  an 
idea,  and  the  tendency  is  to  overstatement  in  po- 
litical argument.  The  very  fact  that  it  was  thought 
necessary  in  Germany  to  organize  such  extensive 
campaigns  and  to  harangue  the  German  people 
about  German  and  Pan-German  ideals  suggests  at 
least  an  original  general  apathy  or  ignorance  and 
need  of  a  propaganda.  How  far  has  this  been  over- 
come? 

We  never  know  until  after  the  votes  are  counted 


38  The  Creed  of  Deutschtu7n 

what  the  opinion  of  the  people  is.  Now  the  point 
I  have  in  mind  is  how  far  does  the  great  silent 
thought  of  the  people  share  these  ideals  which  have 
been  so  noisily  taught  by  the  classes?  Suppose 
that  a  questionnaire  on  the  creed  of  Germandom 
were  circulated  throughout  the  whole  people  of 
Germany,  how  would  the  masses  answer  the  ques- 
tions ?  Probably  no  one  inside  or  outside  Germany 
really  knows.  But  it  is  probable  that  as  in  all  coun- 
tries they  would  follow  their  leaders  when  it  came 
to  action.  We  know  that  the  Kaiser,  the  govern- 
ment and  the  controlled  press,  the  Junkers  and  the 
commercial  and  industrial  groups  represented  by 
six  of  the  most  important  industrial  and  agricul- 
tural associations,  the  intellectuals,  the  military  and 
naval  castes,  the  captains  of  industries,  the  conser- 
vative and  liberal  political  parties  and  many  other 
class  groups  are  devotees  to  the  creed  of  Das 
Deutschtum  either  as  a  whole  or  in  one  or  more 
of  its  articles  of  faith.  According  to  the  concrete 
issues  to  the  front  at  any  time  one  ideal  naturally 
dominates  the  thought  of  the  day  to  the  exclusion 
of  others.  Just  at  present  the  war  has  necessarily 
forced  into  the  focus  of  interest  the  Pan-Germanic 
idea  of  extension  of  territory  by  annexation  of  the 
conquered  countries.  *     Opinion  on  this  issue  is 

*  For  an  important  account  and  discussion  of  German  opinion  on 
tliis  point  see  "German  Land  Hunger"  by  Professor  Munroe  Smith 
in  the  Political  Science  Quarterly  for  September  1917.  This  article 
is  a  review  of  "Das  annexionistische  Deutschland"  (A  collection  of 
documents  published  or  circulated  in  Germany  since  Aug.  4,  1914)  by 
S.  Grumbach,  Payot  &  Co.,  Lausanne,  1917. 


Tlie  Creed  of  Deutschtum  39 

necessarily  more  or  less  governed  or  modiified  from 
time  to  time  by  the  requirements  of  practical  poli- 
tics and  the  changing  war  situations.  It  would  ap- 
pear, however,  from  the  evidence  in  hand,  that  the 
dominant  opinion  of  the  classes  looks  upon  the  pres- 
ent hour  as  the  golden  opportunity  to  grasp  the 
fruits  of  military  victory  and  thus  at  last  bring  to 
fruition  this  particular  long-cherished  aspiration  of 
Das  Deutschtum  by  annexing  Belgium,  northern 
France,  the  Baltic  provinces,  Poland  and  large 
slices  of  Russia.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Social 
Democrats  have  consistently,  since  1914,  repudi- 
ated "annexations,"  but  as  Munroe  Smith!  shows 
us,  "the  majority  group  did  not  reject  territorial 
guarantees  and  securities,"  evidently  infected  by 
the  patriotic  hysteria  of  the  war  fever. 

The  Social-Democrats 

To  Das  Deutschtum,  as  a  whole  the  members  of 
this  large  political  group  have  been  classed  as  "dis- 
senters," if  not  heretics.  Indeed  it  is  difficult  to 
see  how  this  democratic  party — for  such  it  really  is 
— can  have  reconciled  some  of  these  articles  of  faith 
with  their  own  party  platforms.  Indeed  it  has  been 
opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  war,  a  large  military 
establishment  and  colonial  expansion.  In  its  last 
jjarty  platform  of  1912  the  social-democrats  defi- 
nitely recorded  themselves  on  these  points.  Then, 
too,  the  long  and  bitter  struggle  which  they  carried 

t  loc.  cit. 


40  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

on  for  years  against  the  Government,  since  the 
time  of  Bismarck,  can  only  be  interpreted  as  a  re- 
pudiation of  that  conception  of  the  State  which  has 
been  so  systematically  taught  by  the  schools  and 
universities.  On  the  other  hand,  concrete  issues  in 
which  they  have  opposed  the  State  have  related 
mostly  to  internal  reforms,  such  as  the  ballot,  and 
have  not  touched  the  philosophy  of  Pan-German- 
ism. But  it  is  also  true  that  the  doctrine  of  a  Super- 
Germanic,  blue-eyed,  and  blond-race  has  infected 
the  proletarian  socialists  as  well  as  the  other  classes. 
The  members  of  this  group  are  human  and  Ger- 
mans as  well  as  social-democrats,  and  the  doctrines 
of  the  superiority  of  the  German  race  and  its  mis- 
sion to  regenerate  the  world  are  not  incompatible 
with  their  platform,  and  have  touched  the  soft  spots 
of  egotism  and  vanity  in  their  personalities.  It  is 
expecting  too  much  of  human  nature  that  they 
should  not  have  accepted  the  teachings  of  renowned 
students  and  historians  and  "race-biologists"  who 
have  dinned  into  their  ears  their  superiority  over 
all  other  races  and  the  great  benefit  that  will  come 
to  humanity  by  the  "peaceful  penetration"  of  the 
world  by  German  kultur.  And  so  they  have  shut 
their  eyes  to  the  methods  of  intrigue,  and  deceit, 
and  espionage,  by  which  peaceful  penetration  was 
being  brought  about.  The  "mission"  of  Germany 
activated  largely  by  the  super-race  delusion  re- 
ceived from  them  little  if  any  resistance.  It  is 
only  to  the  militaristic  methods  of  regenerating  the 
world  that  they  have  taken  exception. 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  41 

That  the  majority  of  the  social-democrats  have 
largely  supported  the  government  afte?'  war  was 
declared  proves  nothing. 

We  are  allowed  to  know  so  little  of  what  has 
been  going  on  inside  German}^  since  war  was  begun 
that  no  one  outside  probably  can  speak  from  direct 
knowledge.  But  there  are  a  few  known  facts  and 
certain  general  principles  that  can  be  offered  with- 
out danger  of  being  wrong. 

In  the  first  place,  we  know  that  all  Germans  have 
been  made  to  believe — probably  because  they  want- 
ed to  believe — that  Germany  was  attacked,  and  the 
social-democrats  always  said  they  would  defend  the 
Fatherland  if  attacked.  As  Francke  who  knows 
his  Fatherland  has  testified : 

They  [the  masses  as  well  as  the  intellectuals]  believe 
that  Germany  has  been  the  victim  of  a  world-wide  coali- 
tion to  rob  her  of  the  legitimate  fruits  of  her  unre- 
mitting toil  for  national  organization  and  to  crush  the 
spirit  of  national  solidarity  that  has  led  to  German 
ascendency  in  nearly  every  field  of  higher  activity.  What- 
ever may  be  one's  views  as  to  the  historical  basis  for 
this  belief,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  this  belief 
more  than  anything  else  which  is  giving  Germany  in  this 
war  an  extraordinary  heroic  strength.  .  .  .  Over  and 
over  again  she  has  been  blocked  in  these  enterprises  by 
the  ill  will  of  her  more  grasping  rivals,  and  it  is  hard 
to  resist  the  conclusions  that  the  present  war  was  en- 
tered upon  by  her  enemies  with  the  hope  of  shutting 
her  out  once  for  all  from  the  great  stakes  of  colonial 
expansion.;}: 

Nothing  was  more  naive  than  the  expectation 
that  social-democrats  would  be  disloyal  to  their 

t  loc.  cit. 


42  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

country  after  war  was  declared.  They  were  opposed 
to  the  declaration  of  war  and  disavowed  all  respon- 
sibility therefor.  But  the  Fatherland  being  en- 
gaged in  war  it  became  another  matter. 

In  the  second  place,  it  is  a  common,  everyday 
observation  that  nearly  every  person,  once  in  a  fight, 
forgets  the  cause  and  the  principles  at  issue  and 
goes  in  to  win. 

Thirdly,  social-democrats  are  patriots  and  the 
great  mass  of  patriots  in  any  country  are,  like  all 
bred-in-the~bone  Americans,  for  their  country, 
"right  or  wrong." 

Fourthly,  it  is  a  well-known  psychological  fact 
that  persons  who  have  broken  away,  later  in  life, 
from  the  early  and  deeply  inculcated  sentiments 
and  principles  of  youth  and  accepted  new  points 
of  view  on  intellectual  grounds,  afterwards  in  times 
of  stress,  like  war,  or  misfortune,  or  danger,  tend 
to  revert  to  those  earlier  ingrained  sentiments  in 
which  feeling  is  strongly  incorporated.  And  they 
also  revert  to  the  influence  of  the  primitive  instincts 
which  had  been  brought  under  control  by  the  social 
education.  Striking  examples  of  this  principle  we 
have  seen  amongst  the  hyphenated  (German) 
Americans  in  this  country. 

We  can  safely  say,  then,  in  spite  of  their  attitude 
during  the  war,  that  most  of  the  ideals  of  Das 
Deutschtum  were  not  shared  on  the  whole  by  the 
social-democrats  before  the  war.  And  there  is  good 
reason  to  believe  that  when  the  time  comes  for 
peace,  this  large  group  of  Germans  will  be  found 


Tlie  Creed  of  Deutschtum  43 

to  support  the  demand  of  the  rest  of  the  world  for 
the  suppression  of  Prussian  miHtarisni  and  Prus- 
sian autocracy.  With  the  subsidence  of  the  excite- 
ment of  war  the  principles  of  democracy  will  once 
again  become  dominant  in  their  thoughts. 

As  to  the  mass  of  the  rest  of  the  German  "peo- 
ple,"* we  have  to  guide  us  the  information  brought 
out  of  Germany  by  foreign  diplomats  and  corre- 
spondents of  the  press  and  the  testimony  of  neu- 
trals who  have  resided  or  travelled  in  Germany 
after  the  outbreak  of  war,  and  we  have  the  utter- 
ances of  so-called  representative  men  and  of  the 
press,  the  parliamentary  debates  of  party  repre- 
sentatives and  a  vast  mass  of  writings.  Through 
all  this  there  runs  a  concordance  of  testimony  show- 
ing few  discordant  notes  amongst  the  Germans 
themselves.  Undoubtedly  these  notes  would  be 
more  strident  and  more  numerous  if  it  were  not 
for  the  official  censorship.  But,  also  undoubtedly, 
the  intolerant  social  censorship  of  the  majority  pub- 
lic opinion  is  quite  as  powerful  in  suppressing  in- 
dividual revolt  as  the  official  censorship.  That  is 
true  in  all  communities.  And  in  Germany,  as  else- 
where, there  must  be  a  large  number  of  the  ignorant 
and  the  uneducated,  the  "boobs,"  who  are  too  unin- 
telligent to  have  any  opinions  at  all  on  national 
ideals  and  therefore  on  the  philosophy  and  the  ideals 
of  Das  Deutschtum.    These  can  be  left  out  of  ac- 

*  I  put  aside  the  Pan-Germanists,  Junkers  and  other  groups  whose 
sentiments  are  well  known  to  be  those  of  Das  Deutschtum. 


44  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

count.  It  is  only  the  dominants  that  count.  But 
of  the  dominant  intelligent  classes,  aside  from  the 
military  caste,  whether  men  of  business  affairs  en- 
gaged in  manufactures,  and  commerce,  and  finance, 
and  industry,  or  of  the  professions,  or  agriculture, 
or  other  vocations,  the  evidence  goes  to  show,  as 
many  have  pointed  out,  the  vast  majority  have  ac- 
cepted and  become  inoculated  with  the  teachings 
of  the  universities  and  higher  schools  and  of  the 
"intellectuals."  They  have  become  permeated  with 
the  ideals  of  the  Creed  of  Deutschtum  until  these 
have  become  habits  of  thought  and  second  nature. 
Of  course  one  ideal  is  more  controlling  in  one 
mind  and  one  in  another.  We  have  only  to  look 
about  us  in  this  country  and  note  the  sentiments  of 
Germans  and  so-called  German- Americans,  bom 
and  educated  in  Germany  but  now  living  in  our 
midst.  Nearly  all  these,  almost  without  exception, 
even  moderate  men  like  Professor  Francke  who 
wish  to  be  loyal  to  American  ideals  were,  before 
we  entered  the  war,  dominated  by  German  thought, 
German  ideals,  and  admiration  for  German  kultur. 
These  men,  under  the  reactionary  impulses  awak- 
ened by  the  war,  reverted,  as  was  natural,  to  the  in- 
culcated teaching  of  their  youth. 

But  the  "state  of  mind"  of  Germans  in  the 
United  States  is  only  in  part  to  be  ascribed  to 
reversion.  In  large  part  it  was  due  to  systematic 
organized  propaganda,  begun  and  carried  on  for 
years  before  the  war.  (Article  VI  of  Creed.)  It 
was  carried  on  by  a  German  language  press  and 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  45 

by  German  societies  of  different  kinds,  possibly  by 
some  unconscious  of  its  deeper  purpose.  This 
purpose  was  to  spread  and  inculcate  the  ideas  of 
Das  Deutschtum  in  America  as  has  been  done  in 
South  America  and  other  countries.  Indeed,  ac- 
counts have  been  written  by  German- Americans 
recording  the  progress  of  the  "German  idea"  in 
the  United  States. t 

This  invasion  has  been  a  part  of  the  "peaceful 
penetration"  which  the  German  government  and 
nation  have  persistently  carried  on  in  nearly  all 
countries  in  quest  of  world  dominion.  The  German 
"idea"  is  so  utterly  hostile  to  American  ideals  that 
its  penetration  into  America  can  only  be  regarded 
as  a  menace  to  our  institutions.  And  the  German 
societies  engaged,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  in 
spreading  Das  Deutschtum  in  the  United  States 
must  be  viewed  as  dangerous  elements. 

The  upshot  of  these  two  forces — reversion  and 
propagandism — is  that  the  state  of  mind  of  Ger- 
mans in  the  United  States  fairly  reflects  that  of 
their  countrymen  in  the  Fatherland.  If  we  want 
to  understand  the  dominant  state  of  mind  of  Ger- 
mans at  home  we  have  only  to  examine  that  of 
those  here  in  America. 

The  situation  has  been,  then,  fairly  summed  up 
by  Professor  Francke  when  he  said,  in  December, 

t  Notably  Dos  Deutschtum  in  den  Vereinigten  Staaten  by  Julius 
Goebel,  professor  in  the  University  of  Chicago:  and  Das  Deutschtum 
der  Vereinigten  Staaten,  by  Professor  Karl  Knortz,  Superintendent 
of  Schools  at  Evansville,  Indiana  (1898). 


46  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

1915,  although  possibly  without  realizing  how  it 
would  sound  to  American  ears : 

With  the  exception  of  a  few  Socialist  theorizers,  not 
a  German  has  lifted  his  voice  during  the  last  twelve- 
month but  to  declare  that  this  war  is  the  decisive  test  of 
German  nationality,  of  everything  for  which  Germans 
have  lived  and  died  in  the  past.  American  observers 
have  frequently  expressed  surprise  that  the  intellectual 
and  spiritual  leaders  of  the  Germany  of  to-day,  scien- 
tists like  Haeckel  and  Ostwald,  philosophers  like  Eucken 
and  Wundt,  philologists  like  Wilmanowitz  and  Diels,  his- 
torians like  Eduard  Meyer  and  Erich  Marcks,  economists 
like  Schmoller  and  Wagner,  theologians  like  Harnack 
and  Troeltzsch,  musicians  like  Humperdinck  and  Strauss, 
poets  like  Dehmel  and  Gerhardt  Hauptmann — are  all  of 
one  mind  in  this  crisis,  and  that  in  their  individual  or 
collective  utterances  they  lay  much  more  stress  upon 
conviction  than  argument.  The  reason,  I  think,  is  that 
these  men,  and  with  them  the  masses  of  the  German  peo- 
ple, feel  that  the  German  cause  in  this  war  needs  no 
logical  defense,  that  it  is  impossible  to  think  that  the 
most  orderly,  industrious,  intelligent,  law-abiding,  sober 
and  spiritually  minded  of  nations  should  suddenly  become 
insane,  and  from  sheer  madness  of  passion  and  lust  of 
conquest  have  plunged  into  a  war  of  aggression  against 
the  majority  of  the  world's  military  powers,  in  other 
words  into  what  to  all  outward  appearances  would  seem 
certain  self-destruction.  J 

V 

It  is  safe,  then,  to  say  that  the  policies,  methods 
and  utterances  of  the  statesmen  and  public  men 
of  Germany,  however  shocking  they  have  been  to 
our  ears,  have  in  no  way  misrepresented  the  sen- 

t  loc.  cit. 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  47 

timents  of  the  German  people  as  a  whole. 

When  the  Kaiser  in  a  speech  in  1905  declared 
"We  are  the  salt  of  the  earth,"  all  the  world  outside 
of  Germany  smiled  and  thought  to  itself,  it  is  only 
one  of  the  Kaiser's  exuberant  boastings  and  vain- 
glorious phrases.  But  he  had  not  coined  the  phrase 
although  he  made  it  famous.  It  was  only  a  trite, 
banal  exclamation  which  had  been  repeated  hun- 
dreds of  times  by  others  and  belonged  to  the  thought 
of  Das  Deutschtum.  It  was  as  commonplace  to 
German  ears  as  it  would  be  to  Americans,  if  the 
President  had  said,  "the  American  flag  is  the  most 
glorious  of  flags";  or,  "America  is  'the  home  of  the 
brave  and  the  land  of  the  free.'  " 

And  likewise,  when  the  Kaiser  said,  in  1907,  at 
Miinster : 

Let  all  the  old  and  new  subjects  of  this  Empire,  the 
citizens,  the  peasants,  the  working  men,  unite  in  one  and 
the  same  sentiment  of  love  and  fidelity  towards  the  Fath- 
erland, and  the  German  people  will  be  the  block  of  gran- 
ite, upon  which  our  Lord  God  will  he  able  to  raise  and 
perfect  the  chnlization  of  the  world;  it  is  then  that  the 
saying  of  the  poet  will  be  made  good:  "The  world  some 
day  will  owe  its  salvation  to  Germanism," 

When  he  said  this  he  was  only  repeating  the 
idea  of  the  collaboration  of  God  and  Germany 
which  he  had  learned  in  the  universities  and  which 
had  permeated  German  thought  as  well  as  his  own. 

When  the  German  Chancellor,  von  Bethmann- 
Hollweg,  in  the  stormy  interview  with  the  Eng- 
lish Ambassador  on  August  4,  1914,  characterized 


48  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

the  treaty  guaranteeing  the  neutrality  of  Belgium 
as  only  a  "scrap  of  paper,"  he  said  nothing  shock- 
ing or  even  new  to  the  German  mind.  He  did  not 
even  coin  this  phrase  which  dates  back  to  Fred- 
erick William  IV ;  he  only  made  it  historic.  Like- 
wise in  1901  an  anonymous  writer  in  an  important 
publication  had  used  the  same  expression:  "What 
about  treaties?  In  time  of  war  the  articles  of  all 
treaties  of  neutrality  are  carried  away  by  wind  like 
so  many  scraps  of  ijaper."  *  Although  von  Beth- 
mann-Hollweg's  exclamation  was  uttered  in  a  mo- 
ment of  anger,  which  temporarily  disrupted  his  dip- 
lomatic self-control,  it  gave  away  not  only  the 
real  underlying  belief  of  the  man,  but  one  of  the 
ideals  of  German  statesmanship  long  and  widely 
inculcated  as  one  of  the  ideals  of  Das  Deutschtum. 
The  doctrine  had  been  current  for  years  and  years 
in  Germany.  And  similarly  with  the  claim  of  the 
right  to  invade  a  neutral  state  under  the  "law  of 
necessity."  The  demands  of  statescraft  required 
that  such  principles  as,  "The  German  state  does 
not  consider  itself  bound  by  treaties  when  it  is  for 
her  interest  to  break  them,"  and,  "Small  states 
from  lack  of  power  are  not  states  at  all  and  there- 
fore have  no  rights  and  may  be  invaded,"  should 
not  be  disclosed,  but  should  be  repressed  in  diplo- 
matic intercourse.  Under  the  force  of  the  angry 
emotion  of  the  moment,  the  lid  was  lifted  and  the 
represse'd  ideal  burst  out  to  the  surface.  For  the 
instant,  the  mask  was  removed;  the  diplomatic  ve- 

*  German  Ideals  in  1917  and  in  1914  by  Andr6  Chevrillon. 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  49 

neer,  that  only  imitated  the  morality  of  civilization, 
cracked.  This  is  the  true  significance  of  the  disclo- 
sure which  has  shocked  the  conscience  of  the  world. 
The  doctrine  has  been  preached  and  hammered  into 
the  consciousness  of  the  German  people  until  it 
has  become  one  of  the  cardinal  articles  of  the  Creed 
of  Deutschtum. 

When  von  Biilow,  the  former  Chancellor,  said: 
"The  King  must  be  at  the  head  of  Prussia;  Prussia 
at  the  head  of  Germany ;  and  Germany  at  the  head 
of  the  universe";  and,  "Germany  above  everything, 
everything  in  the  world,"  he  was  only  giving  ex- 
pression to  the  current  thought  of  the  German  peo- 
ple, and  not  merely  to  that  of  the  military  and 
Junker  class,  or  of  the  autocracy  of  which  he  was 
the  official  representative. 

When  General  von  Moltke  wrote  in  1880:  "Per- 
petual peace  is  a  dream,  and  it  is  not  even  a  beau- 
tiful dream.  War  is  part  of  the  eternal  order 
instituted  by  God,"  he  not  only  made  it  easy  for 
the  conscience  of  any  statesman  who  scrupled  to 
declare  war,  but  showed  that  the  army  had  become 
infected  by  the  sophisticated  teachings  of  the  uni- 
versity professors  and  their  ilk,  as  Bernhardi  be- 
came later.  And  he  simply  was  repeating  one  of 
the  Articles  of  the  Creed  of  Deutschtum. 

When  the  German  Secretary  of  State  for  For- 
eign Affairs,  von  Jagow,  a  few  months  before  the 
war,  said  that  "the  small  states  will  no  longer  be 
able  to  enjoy  the  independence  hitherto  perrnitted 
to  them ;  they  are  destined  to  disappear,  or  to  grav- 


50  The  Creed  of  Deutschturrt 

itate  into  the  orbit  of  the  great  Powers,"  he  simply 
upheld  the  doctrine  of  Deutschtum  that  Belgium 
and  Holland  and  Serbia  and  other  small  states  are 
iiot  states  at  all,  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word,  with 
rights  which  great  states  are  bound  to  respect. 
Though  the  policy  of  the  invasion  of  Belgium  and 
Serbia  was  that  of  the  government,  the  force  be- 
hind it  was  the  German  people. 

We  have  all  laughed  at  the  bombastic  painting 
which  the  Kaiser  had  made  of  himself  as  a  Roman 
Emperor  mounted  on  a  prancing  charger  and  we 
thought  of  him,  perhaps,  as  a  silly  fooL  But  there 
could  be  nothing  ridiculous  in  it  to  a  German  who 
has  been  taught  to  believe  that  there  have  been  only 
three  great  periods  in  history,  Hellenism,  Roman- 
ism, and  Germanism,  and  that  Germanism  is  the 
only  and  direct  successor  of  Romanism,*  and  Wil- 
liam II.  the  direct  successor  of  the  Roman  Em- 
perors. The  symbolism  of  the  painting  represents 
one  of  the  theories  of  Deutschtum  and  not  only  the 
megalomania  of  William  II. 

And  so  I  might  run  on  indefinitely  with  the  ut- 
terances and  acts  of  German  statesmen  and  public 
men.  All  this  explains  the  solidarity  of  the  Ger- 
man people  behind  the  Kaiser  in  the  war. 

*  German  Theory  and  Practice  of  War:  Lavisse  &  Andler,  1915. 
This  idea  is  summed  up  in  the  inscription,  quoted  by  these  authors, 
displayed  on  a  restored  Roman  camp  "Trajano,  imperatori 
Romanorum,  Wiihelmus  II  imperator  Germanorum." 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  51 


VI 


The  failure  of  the  statesmen  of  the  Entente  to 
understand  Deutschtum  unquestionably  caused 
them  to  fail  to  realize  the  aims  of  Germany  in  be- 
ginning and  pursuing  the  war;  and  this  failure  led 
to  mistakes  of  strategy  on  their  part. 

If  the  British  Foreign  Minister,  then  Sir  Ed- 
ward Grey,  had  understood  that  the  so-called  "pun- 
ishment" of  Serbia,  in  July,  1914,  for  alleged  po- 
litical offenses  was  only  an  ostensible  motive  put 
out  to  blind  the  world,  and  that  the  real  aim  was 
the  long-planned  and  cherished  ideal  of  Pan-Ger- 
manism to  extend  its  empire  through  the  Balkans, 
he  would  have  also  realized  that  not  soft,  diplo- 
matic appeals  but  only  the  mobilization  of  the  Brit- 
ish fleet,  as  in  1911,  at  the  time  of  the  Agadir  inci- 
dent, would  make  Berlin  "stop,  look  and  listen." 
If  he  had  appreciated  that  the  Serbian  incident  was 
only  the  long  awaited  opportunity  and  excuse  which 
Pan-Germanism  sought,  he  would  have  seen  that 
only  the  vigorous  diplomatic  methods  of  Charles 
Francis  Adams  in  1863  and  Grover  Cleveland  in 
1895  and  Theodore  Roosevelt  in  1902  might  have 
checked  Germany's  aggression. 

If,  later  in  1915,  the  Entente  had  fully  under- 
stood the  mighty,  pent-up  urge  of  that  ideal  of  Das 
Deutschtum  which  for  twenty  j^ears  has  been  ac- 
quiring momentum  within  the  consciousness  of  the 
nation,  they  would  have  realized  that  the  hour  had 


52  The  Creed  of  Deutschtujn 

struck  when  it  would  make  an  effort  to  burst  its 
bonds,  drive  by  the  Iron  Gates  on  the  Danube 
through  Serbia  and  on  to  Constantinople,  and  there 
fulfil  its  ambition.  It  would  have  been  clear  to 
them  that  this  drive  was  bound  to  come  as  soon 
as  we  Americans  had  cleaned  the  country  from 
typhus  fever.*  And  they  would  have  sent  Gen- 
eral Serrail's  army  to  Belgrade  in  1915  when  the 
heroic  Serbian  army  stood  faithfully,  alone,  "the 
guardian  of  the  Gate."!  Instead  they  wasted  at 
Gallipoli  a  splendid  army  that  might  have  barred 
the  passage  of  the  Danube,  saved  Serbia,  held 
Greece  passive,  and  isolated  Bulgaria,  preventing 
her  from  joining  the  Central  Powers.  But  they 
did  not  understand  Deutschtum.  Too  late  they 
sent  General  S  err  ail  to  Saloniki,  and  Germany  has 
gained  this,  her  goal  of  empire,  of  which  she  has 
dreamed  for  twenty  years,  since  the  Kaiser's  visit 
in  1898  to  Palestine  where  he  proclaimed  himself 
the  "protector  of  all  the  Mussulmans." 

And  so  with  Roumania.  An  understanding  of 
Deutschtum  would  have  induced  the  Entente,  un- 
less prepared  to  give  adequate  military  support, 
to  discourage  Roumania,  long  coveted  by  Pan- 
Germanism,  from  entering  the  war,  instead  of  en- 
couraging her  to  do  so,  weak  as  she  was.    Oppor- 

*  This  drive  was  predicted  to  me  in  England  in  the  summer  of 
1915,  by  an  Englishman  who  had  just  returned  from  Serbia.  He 
claimed  that  the  importance  of  sending  forces  to  Belgrade  had  been 
urged  by  Serbia  on  the  Entente. 

t  "She  is  the  guardian  of  the  Gate  and  faithfully  has  she  stood 
to  her  trust."       (Lloyd  George.) 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  53 

tiinity  knocked  at  the  door  of  Berlin.  Well  might 
Das  Deutschtum  answer,  "The  Lord  has  delivered 
into  our  hands  the  lamb  for  which  we  have  lusted. 
Our  chance  has  come  at  last."  What  else  could 
the  Entente  have  expected  but  a  mighty  German 
drive — for  oil  wells,  wheat,  and  extension  of  em- 
j)ire?  For  what  else  did  Germany  originate  this 
war?  "The  sole  object  of  the  war,"  the  Kaiser 
announced  in  a  General  Order  to  his  troops  in  1915, 
"was  to  enforce  the  triumph  of  that  Great  Ger- 
many which  was  to  dominate  all  Europe."  And  so 
the  German  Empire  for  the  present  extends  from 
the  Baltic  to  the  Dardanelles  and  on  into  Asia 
Minor.  And  all  because  the  Entente  failed  to 
grasp  the  need  to  plug  the  hole  through  which  the 
central  powers  poured  their  armies  into  Serbia  and 
weakly  let  down  the  bars  of  the  neutral  gate  that 
kept  them  out  of  coveted  Roumania. 

M.  Cheradame,  through  his  brilliant  writings, 
based  on  studies  of  Germany,  pursued  through 
twenty  years  and  more,  has  opened  the  eyes  of 
America  to  the  systematically  laid  plans  of  Ger- 
many, consistently  held  to  and  developed  for  twen- 
ty years,  to  weld  together  under  German  rule  and 
hegemony  a  "Mittel-Europa,"  and  extend  the  Ger- 
man Empire  from  the  North  Sea  to  Bagdad  and 
the  Persian  Gulf.  The  Pan-Germanic  propaganda 
should  have  rendered  unnecessary  such  expositions. 
But  we  went  our  way  and  would  not  listen  to  warn- 
ings of  students  of  Germany.  M.  Cheradame  has 
done  us  great  service  not  only  in  setting  in  the 


54  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

clear  light  of  day  these  German  designs  and  im- 
perial policies,  pursued  unremittingly  since  1898, 
the  time  of  the  Kaiser's  visit  to  Damascus  and  the 
then  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs,  von  Biilow,  but 
in  getting  our  attention  and  making  us  listen.  It 
has  now  become  perfectly  clear,  as  light  has  been 
thrown  from  many  sources  on  German  activities, 
that  the  attack  on  Serbia  in  1914  (originally 
planned  for  1913)  was  intended  to  be  the  prelim- 
inary and  necessary  step  to  accomplish  the  final 
conquest  of  "Mittel-Euroxia"  and  beyond — the 
"Drang  nach  Osten."  Serbia  was  the  block  wedged 
in  between  Austria-Hungary,  on  the  North,  and 
Bulgaria  and  Turkey  on  the  South,  and  had  to 
be  eliminated. 

This  ambition  of  a  German  Mittel-Europa  and 
beyond — Hamburg  to  Bagdad — is  the  concrete  ap- 
plication of  the  doctrine  of  Article  VII  of  the 
"Creed,"  the  mission  of  Germany  to  extend  her 
territories  at  the  expense  of  less  meritorious  peo- 
ples. Further  the  Balkans  and  Asia  Minor  are 
only  the  southeastern  extension  of  Mittel-Europa. 
The  full  plan  included  the  countries  to  the  north 
— Holland  and  Belgium. 

But  let  us  not  lose  sight  of  the  fact,  in  focussing 
our  attention  on  the  territorial  hegemony  of  Ger- 
many, that  the  extension  of  territories  in  Europe 
by  force  is  only  one  particular  expression  of 
"Deutschland  ueber  Alles."  It  is  the  result  of  only 
one  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Creed.  And  the  driving 
force  that  provides  the  national  will  to  accomplish 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  55 

the  purpose  by  military  power  is  Das  Deutschtum. 
If  all  the  states  concerned  chose  voluntarily,  by 
their  free  will  and  accord  (an  inconceivable  prop- 
osition) to  form  a  single  confederation,  the  rest  of 
the  world  could  not  righteously  interfere.  For  it 
would  be  to  control  the  right  of  free  peoples  to 
work  out  their  destinies  in  their  own  way.  The  great- 
est danger  to  the  freedom  of  the  world — for  which 
democracy  is  contending — is  that  great  national 
Delusion  which  conceives  the  mission  of  the  Ger- 
man State  and  the  German  people  to  be  to  regener- 
ate the  rest  of  the  world,  conceived  as  inferior  peo- 
ples, by  the  domination  of  German  ideas  and  Ger- 
man kultur,  and  German  power. 

It  is  Das  Deutschtum  that  has  inspired  Germany 
and  given  force  to  such  policies.  Without  its  in- 
sane delusions  they  could  not  live  one  minute.  Das 
Deutschtum  has  made  possible  the  militaristic  gov- 
ernment, and  given  moral  support  to  the  military 
oligarchy  and  the  Junker  caste.  Prussian  mili- 
tarism is  only  a  tool — the  "hammer. "J  Other  tools 
have  been  peaceful  commercial  penetration  of  the 
nations  and  systematic  propaganda,  open  and  se- 
cret. These,  as  we  now  know,  have  been  most  ef- 
fective German  measures. 

It  was  in  the  event  that  other  nations  would  re- 

t  "In  the  coming  century  Germany  must  be  the  hammer  or  the 
anvil" — Speech  of  von  Biilovv,  December  11,  1897.  This  is  a  favorite 
figure  of  speech  with  the  Germans.  Professor  Mahling,  Privy  Coun- 
cillor of  the  consistory,  in  an  address  asked,  "Do  we  desire  to  be 
the  hammer  which  God  wields?" 


56  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

fuse  to  be  peacefully  regenerated  and  to  accept 
the  Divine  Mission  of  Das  Deutschtum  that  it  be- 
came necessary  to  have  ready  as  a  threat  the  most 
powerful  armies  and  navies  in  the  world;  and  then 
when  the  crisis  came  to  resort  to  the  hammer — 
military  force  and  Prussian  militarism. 

It  is  easy,  too,  to  see  that  under  the  claim  to  be 
the  chosen  of  God  to  do  His  divine  Will,  Fright- 
fulness,  invented  and  taught  by  their  great  military 
authority  Clausewitz  and  later  systematized  by  the 
German  war-staff,  is  easily  justified  to  themselves 
by  the  people  as  it  was  in  the  middle  ages  when 
employed  in  religious  crusades  against  heretics. 


VII 

That  the  German  people  seriously  believe, 
or  rather  have  made  themselves  believe,  that 
they  believe  in  the  Divine  Mission  of  them- 
selves, just  as  the  Kaiser  has  made  himself 
believe  in  his  divine  right  to  rule,  must  not 
be  ignored  if  we  are  to  understand  the  forces  that 
we  are  up  against  in  this  war  and  are  to  make  sure 
of  a  lasting  peace.  But  that  this  call,  whether  di- 
vine or  from  an  exalted  State,  to  regenerate  the 
world  is  the  real  motive  which  has  impelled  the 
German  nation  to  extend  its  dominion  to  World 
Empire,  no  tyro  in  psychology  will  believe  for  one 
moment. 

It  is  too  grotesque.     It  is  accompanied  by  too 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  57 

great  ardor  and  emotion.  And  the  purpose  coin- 
cides too  closely  with  the  material  interest  of  Ger- 
many. Suppose  it  was  against  Germany's  inter- 
est, does  any  one  believe  that  Germany  would  listen 
to  the  call  of  God?  Some  political  writers  have 
swallowed  this  ostensible  motive,  hook,  bait  and  line. 
Granted  it  is  the  motive  the  Germans  have  given 
to  themselves.  Psychology,  as  well  as  practical 
politics,  teaches  us  that  we  must  look  deeper  below 
the  surface  for  the  real  motive. 

The  real  motive  is  nothing  but  pure  greed;  the 
desire  for  material  and  political  power  and  expan- 
sion, for  self-aggrandizement  at  the  expense  of 
others — world  empire  in  a  material  sense. 

"Was  wir  brauchen  wir  nehmen"t — what  we 
want  we  take — has  been  the  inner  concealed  thought 
of  the  Germans. 

But  this  sordid  motive  of  self-aggrandizement 
must  be  made  acceptable  and  be  justified  to  them- 
selves. So,  by  the  well  known  process  of  sophis- 
tical rationalizing,  it  is  transformed  and  made  pal- 
atable to  a  chosen  people  as  a  Divine  Mission.  Psy- 
chologically, that's  easy  enough. 

Nevertheless,  as  a  phenomenon  of  social  psy- 
chology, bordering  on  psychiatry,  the  fact  of  a 
whole  nation  being  inspired  and  impelled  by  a  mys- 
tic ideal  is  of  great  interest  and  well  worthy  of 
study. 

But  more  important  to-day  is  the  recognition  of 
the  fact  that  Das  Deutschtum  is  the  force  behind 

t  See  pages  78,  79. 


58  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Prussian  militarism,  behind  Prussian  frightfulness, 
behind  German  ideas  of  State,  Power,  Empire,  be- 
hind the  lust  for  extension  of  territories  and  every 
act  of  Germany  responsible  for  this  war  and  the 
way  it  has  been  carried  on. 

How  superficial,  then,  is  the  view  that  this  war 
is  not  directed  against  the  German  people  but  only 
against  the  German  ruling  classes. 

It  may  be  expedient  as  a  matter  of  political  tac- 
tics to  separate  the  people  from  the  Government 
in  the  responsibility  for  this  war,  but  the  real  re- 
sponsibility lies  with  those  who  have  cultivated  the 
ideals  of  which  the  Government  is  only  the  expo- 
nent. And  now,  when  the  war  is  a  fact,  that  the 
great  majority  of  the  German  people  stand  solidly 
behind  their  Kaiser  as  their  champion  in  the  war, 
no  student  of  Germany  has  doubted.  Nevertheless, 
history  has  shown  that  the  collectively  held  ideas 
of  a  people  are  capable  of  undergoing  revolution- 
ary transfoiTnation.  The  government  is  fighting 
for  its  own  existence,  for  the  perpetuation  of  its 
own  power,  and  nothing  like  self -abdication  can  be 
expected  of  it.  But  it  is  within  the  bounds  of 
possibility  that  under  the  influence  of  a  tactfully 
conducted  propaganda  the  masses  of  the  people 
may  be  made  to  see  that,  on  the  one  hand,  they  were 
misled  into  believing  that  Germany  was  attacked 
from  a  desire  to  dismember  the  Empire,  and,  on 
the  other,  that  with  the  object  lesson  before  them 
of  British,  French,  Italian  and  American  efficiency, 
their  faith  in  the  divine  mission  of  a  blond  super- 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  59 

race  has  been  nothing  but  a  social  delusion.  With 
the  scales  fallen  from  their  eyes  they  might,  quite 
possibly,  as  peoples  have  done  before,  make  a 
scapegoat  of  the  Government  and  its  professorial 
and  political  "machine."  It  would  be  an  evolution 
and  not  a  revolution. 

Das  Deutschtuin  then  is  a  state  of  mind  of  the 
German  people.  Unless  either  the  power  of  Ger^ 
many  to  wage  war  be  totally  destroyed,  or  unless 
this  state  of  mind  is  destroyed  and  the  German 
people  are  awakened  out  of  the  delusional  state  into 
which  they  have  argued  themselves,  unless  they  are 
made  to  face  the  truth,  to  see  the  truth  in  all  its 
horrible  nakedness,  there  can  be  no  lasting  peace. 
The  German  menace  will  persist.  This  every  one 
in  France  sees  and  understands.  There  are  no  illu- 
sions, no  misunderstandings,  no  attempt  to  hide 
from  the  facts,  in  spite  of  a  passionate  longing  for 
2)eace,  to  escape  the  misery  of  war,  to  save  the  rem- 
nants of  their  devastated  land,  to  save  further  sac- 
rifice of  the  sons  of  France.  The  man  in  the  street 
knows  the  truth.  The  poilu  in  the  trenches  knows 
the  truth.  The  workman  in  the  factory,  the  peas- 
ant in  the  fields,  the  women  of  France — all  know 
the  truth. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  people  of  England. 
They,  one  and  all,  understand,  as  the  people  of 
America  are  only  just  dimly  beginning  to  under- 
stand, the  German  state  of  mind.  What  use,  if  a 
lasting  peace  is  to  be  achieved,  only  to  liberate 


60  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Belgium  and  France  and  Serbia  and  all  the  other 
countries  now  within  the  German  war  map;  and 
even  Alsace  and  Lorraine?  What  use,  if  a  lasting 
peace  is  to  be  achieved,  to  destroy  even  the  Prus- 
sian autocracy,  unless  the  power  to  wage  war  or 
the  delusional  state  of  mind,  the  German  national 
consciousness.  Das  Deutschtum,  be  destroyed — be 
cured  and  regenerated?  What  use  to  make  peace 
now  if  some  day  the  war  is  to  be  fought  all  over 
again? 

Such,  according  to  my  experience,  is  the  one  per- 
vading thought  shared  by  substantially  all  the  peo- 
ple of  France  and  England.  All  are  united  in 
the  belief  that  to  make  a  peace  that  shall  not  be  a 
lasting  peace  is  only  to  shirk  the  responsibility,  to 
transmit  to  the  next  generation  the  task  only  half 
finished.  It  would  mean  that  all  the  sacrifices  they 
have  made  would  be  in  vain. 

And  so  the  people  of  France  and  the  people  of 
Great  Britain  are  ready  to  go  on,  and  on,  and  on, 
making  untold  sacrifices  that  their  children  and 
their  children's  children  may  not  have  to  endure, 
as  the  present  generation  has  had  to  endure,  this 
agony  and  bloody  sweat. 

And  so  out  of  this  deep,  silent  conviction,  and 
this  grim  determination,  there  has  arisen  a  spirit 
of  self-sacrifice.  By  this  their  fortitude  is  sus- 
tained. This  is  one  of  the  great  lessons  of  this 
war.  One  splendid  manifestation  of  this  spirit  is 
the  way  the  women  of  France  and  Great  Britain 
have  come  forward  and  taken  the  places  of  the 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  61 

men  in  the  fields  and  in  the  workshops.  Like  the 
men  they  have  responded  to  the  call  of  country. 
One  sees  them  by  the  thousands  and  tens  of  thou- 
sands; sowing  the  fields  and  tilling  the  harvest;  at 
the  lathe  and  forge  and  furnace;  making  and  fill- 
ing the  shells,  and  doing  nearly  every  sort  of  work 
in  every  sphere  where  work  is  required  of  some- 
body. 

It  is  a  wonderful  lesson,  that  of  self-sacrifice. 
We,  too,  are  learning  it  but  we  have  much  to 
learn. 

I  know  no  more  beautiful  expression  of  this  spirit 
than  that  which  I  saw  in  France.  It  was  in  a  large 
military  cemetery  at  Chalons-sur-Marne.  This 
cemetery  was  dedicated  by  their  comrades  to  the 
soldiers  of  the  IV  army  fallen  in  that  sector  in  the 
great  Champagne  drive  of  July- August,  1915.  As 
we  entered  the  enclosure,  stretched  before  us  were 
endless  rows  of  graves,  row  on  row,  each  grave 
reverently  and  beautifully  planted  with  flowers  and 
surmounted  by  a  black  cross  of  generous  propor- 
tions marked  with  a  white  disc  inscribed  with  the 
name  of  a  dead  soldier  of  France.  Private  and  of- 
ficer lay  side  by  side  without  distinction.  The 
aspect  and  atmosphere  of  the  place  were  so  impres- 
sive of  reverence  and  love  that  instinctively  each  of 
us  bared  his  head  and  spoke  in  subdued  tones.  Then 
we  read  on  a  monument — a  simple  shaft  erected  to 
the  memory  of  the  dead,  these  words: 


62  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

"A  nos  Morts. 

Le  mort  n'est  rien.     Vive  la  tombe 

quand  le  pays  en  sort  vivant. 

En  avant !"  J 

Das  Deutschtum  during  long  years  of  prepara- 
tion planned  for  the  dominion  of  the  world  by  Ger- 
many. It  deliberately  planned  for  a  world  war 
if  necessary  to  carry  out  its  ambitions  of  lust.  For 
this  purpose  it  fostered  and  encouraged  an  arro- 
gant, monstrous,  military  caste  and  autocracy.  It 
created  a  colossal  army  ready  to  strike  at  a  mo- 
ment's notice  to  enforce  its  will.  It  had  been  build- 
ing a  navy  for  a  score  of  years  not  for  defense 
but  to  secure  conquests  in  every  part  of  the  globe 
and  wrest  the  colonies  of  other  nations  from  their 
allegiance.  It  brought  on  this  war  against  an  un- 
suspecting world.  It  has  caused  untold  misery, 
desolation,  the  destruction  of  venerated  monuments 
of  art  and  religion,  the  massacres  of  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  innocent  people  and  atrocities  hith- 
erto inconceivable;  it  has  caused  the  killing  and 
maiming  of  millions  of  men;  the  wasting  of  the 
accumulated  wealth  of  the  world  and  of  the  pro- 
ductive activities  of  generations  to  come.  It  has 
forced  the  people  of  the  United  States,  as  well  as 

t  To  our  Dead. 

Death  is  nothing.    Hurrah  for  the 

tomb  when  from  it  springs  forth  a  living  nation. 

Forward ! 

On  another  face  of  the  monument  is  inscribed: 

"Gloire  a  notre  France  6ternelle 
Glolre  a  ceux  qui  sent  morts  pour  elle." 


The  Creed  of  Deutschtum  63 

others,  to  give  over  the  peaceful  pursuits  of  happi- 
ness and  social  welfare  and  sacrifice  the  lives  and 
well-being  of  its  youth  in  a  dreadful  war.  It  has 
forced  them  to  pile  up  billions  of  debt  and  mort- 
gage their  future  earnings  that  would  have  been 
used  to  make  their  land  better  to  live  in  and  their 
homes  prosperous  and  happy. 

All  this  misery  and  much  more  has  it  done.  And 
for  this  the  Creed  of  Das  Deutschtum  must  be  de- 
stroyed, renounced  forever  for  the  salvation  and 
freedom  of  mankind. 

And  so  supported  by  the  spirit  of  self-sacrifice, 
we  Americans,  too,  must  go  on  and  on  until  the 
conflict  between  the  ideals  of  Germany  and  the 
ideals  of  the  West  is  settled  for  all  time. 

"The  'Battle  Hymn  of  the  Republic'  must  be  still 
our  hymn: 

"In  the  beauties  of  the  lilies  Clirist  was  born  across  the 

sea. 
With  a  glory  in  his  bosom  that  transfigures  you  and  me : 
As  he  died  to  make  men  holy,  let  us  die  to  make  men  free, 

While  God  is  marching  on." 

We  must  go  on  using  all  our  man  power,  and 
all  our  resources,  the  economic  blockade  and  the  so- 
cial boycott,  until  the  Germans  have  awakened  out 
of  the  temporary  obsessions  by  which  they  have 
been  afflicted  for  years  and  years.  We  must  go 
on,  ready,  like  the  people  of  the  British  Empire 
and  the  people  of  France,  for  every  sacrifice,  until 
the  Germans  are  prepared  to  face  themselves  and 
the  ugliness  of  the  doctrines  they  call  ideals.    We 


64  The  Creed  of  Deutschtu7n 

must  go  on  until  the  people  of  Germany  themselves, 
no  longer  blinded,  realize  that  Das  Deutschtum  is 
only  the  delusion  of  a  social  insanity  and  with  clear 
vision  take  the  reins  of  government  into  their  own 
hands.  We  must  go  on  until  they  are  prepared, 
to  make  atonement  and  reparation  for  the  past 
and  by  accepting  the  ideals  of  western  democracies 
give  guarantees  of  a  lasting  peace.  Victory  will 
come,  but  it  will  be  the  victory  of  Democracy  which, 
though  now  using  the  sword,  only  seeks  the  free- 
dom of  the  world. 


PRUSSIAN  MILITARISM  AND 
A  LASTING  PEACE 


AN     ADDRESS     DELIVERED     BEFORE     THE     WORCESTER 
churchmen's  club,  WORCESTER,  FEBRUARY  7,  1917. 


PRUSSIAN  MILITARISINI  AND 
A  LASTING  PEACE 

WHEN  you  did  me  the  honor  of  mak- 
ing me  your  guest  this  evening  you 
invited  me  to  si^eak  on  the  subject 
of  the  war  which  is  now  in  every 
one's  mind  and  heart. 

Indeed,  the  time  has  come  when  the  American 
people  are  called  upon  to  think  long  and  seriously 
and  deeply  upon  the  principles  involved  in  this 
war.  For  these  principles  vitally  concern  Amer- 
ican interests,  and  we  are  now  likely  at  any  mo- 
ment to  be  called  upon  to  take  part  in  this  war. 
If  we  are  drawn  in  no  one  can  foresee  what  lies 
before  us,  how  far  we  shall  go,  where  or  what  the 
end  shall  be. 

Nor  can  we  foresee  what  will  be  the  final  effect 
upon  our  own  institutions,  what  changes  in  our  own 
policies  and  system  will  result. 

During  the  course  of  several  weeks  we  were  kept 
in  a  tense  condition  of  suspense  while  possible  terms 
of  peace  were  discussed  by  the  belligerents  and  our 
Government  and  it  was  mooted  whether  peace 
could  be  secured  without  victory  or  only  with  vic- 
tory. And  now  the  dramatic  events  of  the  past 
week  have  forced  us  to  take  a  stand  in  defense  of 
American    rights.      The    President    had    to    face 

67 


68  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

squarely  a  position  in  which  there  was  no  alter- 
native. Only  one  course  was  open  to  him — to  keep 
his  plighted  word.  That  course  he  took.f  And  I 
believe  every  true  American,  no  matter  how  severe 
a  critic  of  the  Administration  he  has  been  hitherto, 
will  stand  up  and  support  him  in  the  step  he  has 
taken  and  in  any  measures  he  may  take  in  defense 
of  American  honor  and  American  rights 

But  this  action  of  the  President,  these  latest  dra- 
matic events,  to  which  I  have  referred,  have  tended 
to  push  into  the  background  of  the  mind  the  gen- 
eral principles  underlying  the  war,  and  to  bring 
out  into  the  focus  of  attention  of  the  American 
mind  only  a  particular  concrete  application  of  these 
principles — viz:  the  denial  of  freedom  of  the  seas 
by  ruthless  submarine  warfare. 

It  has  been  difficult  to  make  the  people  of  cer- 
tain sections  of  this  country,  particularly  the  West, 
understand  and  still  more  to  interest  them  in  the 
principles  involved  in  this  war.  But  now  that  con- 
crete American  rights  are  avowedly  to  be  attacked^ 
they  have  become  aroused  and  have  rallied  with 
gratifying  unanimity  in  defiance  of  the  "mad-man 
of  Europe." 

Yet  the  denial  to  Americans  by  Germany  of  free- 
dom of  the  seas  is  not  solely  a  war  measure  dic- 
tated by  the  military  exigencies  of  the  moment  but 
a  concrete  application,  as  I  shall  contend,  of  prin- 

t  Breaking  oflf  diplomatic  relations  with  Germany. 
t  German  declaration  of  ruthless  submarine  warfare  beginning  Feb- 
ruary 1,  1917. 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace    69 

ciples  of  Government  which  are  utterly  hostile  to 
American  principles — to  the  American  theory  of 
Government.  These  principles  are  those  of  Prus- 
sian Militarism  and  to  these  I  would  like  to  speak. 

Prussian  Militarism  as  an  issue  is  fundamental 
to  terms  of  peace;  it  is  fundamental  to  the  objects 
of  the  Allies;  it  vitally  affects  American  interests; 
it  vitally  concerns  a  lasting  peace. 

I  want  to  treat  the  subject  from  an  American 

point  of  view,  for  it  concerns  American  ideals, 

American  principles  and  American  interests.    As 

Daniel  Webster  said  in  1823  when  protesting  in  the 

cause  of  Greece  against  Turkish  frightfulness  and 

the  Allied  Powers  of  Europe  of  his  time : 

Let  this  be  then,  and  as  far  as  I  am  concerned  I  hope 
it  will  be,  purely  an  American  discussion ;  but  let  it 
embrace,  nevertheless,  everything  that  fairly  concerns 
America.  Let  it  comprehend  not  merely  her  present  ad- 
vantage but  her  permanent  interest,  her  elevated  char- 
acter as  one  of  the  free  States  of  the  world,  and  her 
duty  toward  those  great  principals  which  have  hither- 
to maintained  the  relative  independence  of  nations,  and 
which  have,  more  especially,  made  her  what  she  is. 

And  so  from  this  same  standpoint  I  want  to 
ask  if  it  is  true,  as  the  President  once  said,  "Amer- 
ica is  not  concerned  with  the  causes  and  objects  of 
this  war." 

The  Demand  for  the  Suppressio7i  of  Prussian 
Militarism 

Let  me  prelude  what  I  have  to  say  by  calling 
your  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Entente  Powers, 


70  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

in  both  their  notes  in  answer  to  the  Central  Powers 
and  to  Mr.  Wilson,  insisted  upon  the  destruction 
of  Prussian  militarism  as  fundamental  to  all  the 
other  objects  they  have  in  mind  and  to  terms  of 
peace. 

This  object  has  been  well  known  to  the  world  for 
a  long  time.  From  almost  the  beginning  of  the 
war  it  has  been  accentuated  again  and  again  by 
England,  France,  Russia  and  Italy,  until  it  rings 
out  as  the  slogan  of  the  war.  This  condition  of 
peace,  they  have  also  said,  alone  can  furnish  an 
effectual  guarantee  for  a  lasting  peace  which  they 
must  have.  And  therefore,  unless  this  end  be  ac- 
complished and  Prussian  militarism  be  destroyed, 
there  is  no  use  in  making  peace  now  or  at  any  other 
time  for  the  war  would  have  to  be  fought  sooner 
or  later  all  over  again.  The  demand  for  a  lasting 
peace  and  the  demand  for  the  destruction  of  Prus- 
sian militarism  go  hand  in  hand.  We  cannot  have 
the  one  without  the  other. 

This  view  of  the  Allies  has  been  repeatedly  ex- 
pressed through  their  responsible  chiefs.  It  is  not 
mere  rhetoric;  it  is  a  state  of  mind  that  must  be 
taken  into  consideration  in  estimating  the  possibil- 
ity of  peace  without  victory — peace  by  negotiation. 

"We  shall  never  sheathe  the  sword,"  said  Mr. 
Asquith,  in  his  historic  Guildhall  speech,  "which 
we  have  not  lightly  drawn,  until  the  military  dom- 
ination of  Prussia  be  wholly  and  finally  destroyed." 

Mr.  Bonar  Law,  Government  leader  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  defined  the  peace  terms  of  the 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     71 

Allies  as  "restitution,  reparation  and  guaranties 
against  repetition,"  and  Mr.  Lloyd  George  ampli- 
fied this  epigrammatic  definition  as,  "complete  res- 
titution, full  reparation  and  effectual  guaranties." 
What  constitutes  effectual  guaranties  he  set  forth 
when  he  said: 

The  Allies  entered  into  this  war  to  defend  Europe 
against  the  aggression  of  Piiissian  military  domina- 
tion, and  they  must  insist  that  the  end  is  a  most  complete 
and  effective  guarantee  against  the  possibility  of  that 
caste  ever  again  disturbing  the  peace  of  Europe. 

It  is  an  "honorable  and  lasting  peace"  that  is 
wanted. 

Likewise  the  Russian  Duma  lead  off  in  answer 
to  the  German  overtures  for  peace  with  the  dec- 
laration : 

It  [the  Duma]  considers  that  a  lasting  peace  will  be 
possible  only  after  a  decisive  victory  over  the  military 
power  of  the  enemy  and  after  definite  renunciation  by 
Germany  of  the  aspirations  which  render  her  responsible 
for  the  world  war  and  for  the  horrors  by  which  it  has 
been  accompanied. 

The  official  reply  of  the  ten  Entente  Allies  to 
the  proposal  of  the  Central  Powers  for  a  peace  con- 
ference runs: 

Once  again  the  Allies  declare  that  no  peace  is  possible 
...  so  long  as  they  have  not  brought  about  a  settle- 
ment calculated  to  end,  once  and  for  all,  forces  which 
have  constituted  a  perpetual  menace  to  the  nations,  and 
to  afford  the  only  effective  guarantee  for  the  future  se- 
curity of  the  world. 

Likewise  Bonar  Law  explained  the  attitude  of 


72  The  Creed  of  Deutschtmn 

the  British  Government.  He  said  in  the  House  of 
Commons : 

What  are  we  fighting  for?  Not  territory,  not  greater 
strength  as  a  nation.  We  are  fighting  for  two  things — 
for  peace  now  and  for  security  for  peace  in  time  to  come. 
Let  the  House  remember  what  happened  in  this  war^ — out- 
rages in  Belgium,  outrages  by  sea  and  land,  massacres  in 
Armenia  which  Germany  could  have  stopped  by  a  word 
-T-then  realize  this:  The  war  will  have  been  fought  in 
vain — utterly  in  vain,  unless  we  can  make  sure  that  it 
shall  never  again  be  in  the  power  of  any  State  to  do 
what  Germany  has  done. 

The  Central  Powers,  it  will  be  remembered, 
wanted  to  fix  up  a  peace  first  through  a  Confer- 
ence and  later,  after  present  peace  had  been  agreed 
upon,  to  enter  into  arrangements  to  preserve  fu- 
ture peace. 

The  great  work  of  preventing  future  wars,  they  said, 
can  be  begun  only  after  the  end  of  the  present  struggle 
of  the  nations.  (Reply  to  President  Wilson's  peace  note 
to  all  the  belligerent  and  neutral  Powers,  Dec.  18,  1916.) 

And  to  this  Lloyd  Gorge  replied: 

What  guarantee  is  there  that  these  terrors  will  not 
be  repeated  in  the  future?  That,  if  we  enter  into  a 
treaty  of  peace,  we  shall  put  an  end  to  Prussian  mili- 
tarism? 

In  the  same  strain  the  Russian  Duma  announced 
that  it 

considers  that  a  premature  peace  would  not  only  be  a 
brief  period  of  calm,  but  would  also  involve  the  danger 
of  another  bloody  war  and  a  renewal  of  the  deplorable 
sacrifices  by  the  people. 

The  elimination  of  Prussian  militarism,  then, 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     73 

has  taken  on  the  character  of  an  ultimatum  and  a 
paramount  issue. 

Thus,  aside  from  all  other  considerations  and 
terms  and  issues,  there  arose  a  deadlock.  The  En- 
tente held  that  the  destruction  of  Prussian  mili- 
tarism was  the  only  guarantee  of  lasting  peace  and 
that  this  must  be  assured  now  as  one  of  the  terms 
of  present  peace.  The  Central  Powers  took  the 
position  that  international  arrangements  for  future 
peace  should  be  enterd  into  only  after  present  peace 
is  agreed  upon  by  negotiation;  and  the  arrange- 
ments which  have  been  informally  suggested  by 
them  studiously  avoid  including  the  ending  of  Prus- 
sian militarism,  or  any  hint  of  an  admission  that 
there  is  such  a  thing,  much  less  that  it  would  be  sur- 
rendered as  a  guarantee  of  future  peace. 

In  this  situation  neutrals  are  bound  to  ask  them- 
selves whether  Prussian  militarism  is  such  a  men-" 
acing  thing  to  the  future  peace  of  the  world  that 
the  demand  for  its  abolition  in  the  terms  for  pres- 
ent peace  cannot  be  compromised;  or  whether  it  is 
a  matter  of  such  indifference  that  it  can  be  left 
to  future  international  arrangements.  In  the  lat- 
ter case  they  must  ask  themselves  if  it  is  likely  that 
Germany,  after  this  war  is  ended  by  negotiation 
and  danger  of  defeat  averted,  would  accept  this 
demand  of  the  Allies  as  one  of  the  later  arrange- 
ments to  guarantee  future  peace.  In  other  words, 
does  it  matter  much  one  way  or  the  other  so  long 
as  the  present  conflict  is  settled?  Or  is  the  present 
war  an  outburst  of  a  long  slumbering  irreconcilable 


74  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

and  irrepressible  conflict  of  principles,  of  ideals, 
that  cannot  be  permanently  settled  save  by  military 
conquest — by  peace  with  victory  on  one  side  or 
the  other. 

Remember  that  Germany  proposes  that  the  Allies 
postpone  their  paramount  object  until  after  the  war 
and  trust  to  Germany's  satisfying  their  claim  later. 

What  Is  Prussian  Militarism? 

What  manner  of  thing,  then,  is  "Prussian  Mil- 
itarism" that  the  continuation  of  this  terrible  war 
can  be  justified  until  it  is  destroyed?  Everything 
hangs  on  the  meaning  of  this  abstract  term. 

Most  people  confuse  militarism  with  large  armies 
and  navies  and  even  with  "preparedness"  or  with 
frightful  methods  of  warfare.  But  a  little  consid- 
eration will  show  that  in  principle  it  has  nothing  to 
do  with  the  size  of  a  nation's  army  or  navy  and 
much  less  with  preparedness.  A  nation  might  main- 
tain an  enormous  army  and  yet  this  would  not  be 
militarism.  And  a  nation  might  have  a  small  army 
and  yet  be  a  militaristic  nation. 

What,  then,  is  Prussian  militarism? 

It  is  only  necessary  to  turn  to  German  publicists, 
military  writers,  the  speeches  of  the  Kaiser  and  the 
German  press,  to  learn  the  German  theory  of  gov- 
ernment and  the  part  the  army  plays  in  it,  and  then 
by  correlating  these  with  the  avowed  policies  and 
actual  practice  during  many  years  of  Prussia  and 
the  Imperial  Government,  both  in  internal  and  for^ 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     75 

eign  affairs,  to  extract  the  meaning  of  the  Prussian 
system.  From  all  these  sources  the  world  has  been 
able  to  obtain  an  understanding  of  it  which  it  is  safe 
to  say  the  Entente  Powers  have  in  mind  when  they 
say  it  must  be  "wholly  and  finally  destroyed." 

Now,  according  to  this  conception,  the  funda- 
mental principle  of  Prussian  militarism  is  that  the 
stability,  power  and  will  of  the  nation  rest  not  on 
public  opinion  and  the  will  of  the  people  but  on 
armed  force ;  and  therefore  that  it  is  to  such  armed 
force  that  the  Imperial  Government  looks  not  only 
to  maintain  itself  within  the  empire  but — more  im- 
portant to  other  nations — to  enforce  its  will  and  its 
policies  upon  other  nations  without  the  empire. 

More  concretely,  Prussian  militarism  in  its  ex- 
ternal relations  may  be  defined  as  the  idea  of  ex- 
tending the  nation's  trade  and  system  of  govern- 
ment and  policies  by  force.  And  in  its  official  mili- 
tary code  governkig  methods  of  warfare  the  laws 
of  humanity  have  no  place  under  the  exigency  of 
"necessity." 

Militarism  thus  becomes  something  much  more 
than  a  system  of  defense  against  encroachments 
from  within  and  without — it  is  a  mode  of,  and  or- 
ganization for  attack  in  the  enforcement  of  pro- 
gressive policies,  of  national  "evolution"  (to  use 
von  Bethmann  Hollweg's  phrase),  and  of  the  will 
of  the  State,  whatever  direction  these  may  take. 
It  has  even  been  the  boast,  not  only  of  the  German 
emperor  but  of  a  host  of  German  publicists,  that 
by  the  potential  power  of  its  army  (not,  be  it  noted, 


76  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

by  respect  for  the  rights  of  other  nations),  Ger- 
many has  maintained  peace  itself  between  the  great 
Powers  of  Europe  during  the  past  twenty-five 
years. 

Prussian  mihtarism  depends,  of  course,  for  its 
efficiency,  upon  the  theory,  which  Germany  has  ap- 
phed  in  practice,  that,  if  all  the  available  forces  of 
a  nation — economic,  industrial,  man-power,  etc. — 
are  organized  into  a  military  system  and  that  sys- 
tem is  developed  to  its  very  highest  efficiency  in 
every  one  of  its  multiplicity  of  parts;  and  if  it  be 
placed  under  the  autocratic  control  of  a  govern- 
ment not  responsible  to  the  people,  or  public  opin- 
ion, or  parliament,  it  will  be  so  powerful  as  to  be 
irresistible  against  any  combination  of  powers  likely 
within  human  foresight  to  be  brought  against  it: 
and  that  therefore  no  State  or  likely  combination  of 
States  will  dare  to  attack  it,  on  the  one  hand,  and, 
on  the  other,  it  can  enforce  its  will  on  the  world. 
This  theory,  it  may  be  said  in  passing,  has  been 
shown  to  be  fallacious  by  the  present  war. 

But  this  is  not  the  whole,  nor  perhaps  the  worst 
part  of  the  Prussian  system.  The  worst  has  been 
the  collective  state  of  mind  and  certain  specific 
ideals  instilled  in  the  greater  part  of  the  German 
people  as  a  national  consciousness.  These  include 
the  worship  of  military  prowess  and  power,  and 
self -subjection  to  an  exalted  military  caste;  and 
they  include  national  desires  and  a  national  will — 
a  will  to  bring  national  desires  to  fulfilment  by 
force;  to  take  what  the  State  wants  by  force;  to  ex- 


Prussian  Militarism,  and  a  Lasting  Peace     77 

tend  its  policies,  whether  of  trade  or  empire,  by 
force;  to  gain  "a  place  in  the  sun"  by  force;  to 
brook  no  opposition  under  threat  of  the  sword;  to 
disregard  international  law  and  treaties  and  violate 
neutral  and  weaker  nations.  Therefore  arbitra- 
tion, conciliation,  respect  for  treaties  and  the  nat- 
ural inherent  rights  of  other  peoples  are  not  rec- 
ognized by  militarism,  as  they  were  not  recognized 
when  Germany  in  answer  to  Sir  Edward  Grey  re- 
fused to  entertain  them  to  avert  this  war. 

It  is  obvious,  then,  Prussian  militarism  has  noth- 
ing to  do  with  the  size  of  armies  excepting  so  far 
as  a  relatively  superior  army  may  be  a  necessary 
piece  of  machinery  for  enforcing  its  arbitrary  will. 

The  United  States  might  maintain  a  very  small 
army  and  yet  adopt  militarism  as  a  policy  in  deal- 
ing with  weaker  nations,  like  Mexico  and  some 
South  American  republics.  Or  it  might  maintain 
a  huge  army  of  say  4,000,000  men  and  yet  not  es- 
pouse militarism.  Japan  might  adopt  a  policy  of 
militarism  against  China  but  not  against  great 
Powers. 

And  the  same  is  true  of  a  great  navy.  England 
with  her  mighty  navy  holds  the  supremacy  of  the 
sea,  but  militarism  under  the  name  of  "navalism" 
plays  no  part  in  her  democratic  theory  of  govern- 
ment based  on  public  opinion.  To  speak  seriously 
of  British  navalism  as  synonymous  with  militarism 
is  to  fall  into  the  confusion  of  mistaking  the  size  of 
armaments  with  the  military  theory  of  government. 


78  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Prussian  Militarisin  in  Practice 

Now  it  may  be  fairly  asked,  has  in  practice  Prus- 
sian militarism  really  sought  to  enforce  its  theo- 
retic ideals  on  the  world  in  such  a  wsiy  that  the 
Allies  are  reasonably  justified  in  demanding — sine 
qua  non — that  it  be  destroyed  as  security  for  future 
lasting  peace?  Or  is  it  only  an  unsubstantial  fear, 
or  political  accusation,  and  this  war  only  an  excep- 
tional application?  Is  it  true  that  "Prussia,"  as 
Lloyd  George  has  charged, 

since  she  got  into  the  hands  of  that  caste  [the  military 
caste]  has  been  a  bad  neighbor- — arrogant,  threatening, 
bullying,  shifting  boundaries  at  her  will,  taking  one  fair 
field  after  another  from  weaker  neighbors  and  adding 
them  to  her  own  dominions,  ostentatiously  piling  up 
weapons  of  offense,  ready  on  a  moment's  notice  to  be 
used. 

Or  is  what  Bethmann-Holweg  said  true? 

As  against  this  aggressive  character  of  the  Entente, 
he  asserted,  the  Triple  Alliance  had  always  found  itself 
in  a  defensive  position.  No  honorable  critic  can  deny 
that.  Not  in  the  shadow  of  Prussian  militarism  did  the 
world  live  before  the  war,  but  in  the  shadow  of  the 
policy  of  isolation  which  was  to  keep  Germany  down. 

Let  us  see  what  the  actual  practices  of  Germany 
have  been  within  the  memory  of  the  present  gener- 
ation. 

In  1864  Prussia  wanted  the  Duchies  of  Schles- 
wig-Holstein  and  Lauenburg  and  so,  with  true  Bis- 
marckian  duplicity,  she  picked  a  quarrel  with  Den- 
mark, sent  an  ultimatum  which,  because  Parlia- 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     79 

ment  was  not  in  session,  she  knew  it  was  physically 
impossible  under  the  constitution  to  satisfy  within 
the  48  hours  allowed,  and,  with  Austria  as  a  tool, 
took  these  provinces  by  force  of  arms.  And  Bis- 
marck, as  one  historian  remarks,  regarded  it  "as 
the  diplomatic  masterpiece  of  his  career."  "Was 
wir  brauchen,  wir  nehmen" — "what  we  want  we 
take" — as  a  Prussian  diplomat  once  indiscreetly 
boasted.  The  spoils  for  the  time  being  were  di- 
vided with  her  co-conspirator,  Austria,  giving  to 
that  Empire  Holstein  as  her  share.  But  Prussia 
wanted  more.  She  wanted  all  the  spoils,  and 
wanted  also  for  herself  the  headship  of  the  Ger- 
man Confederation  and  therefore  to  get  rid  of  her 
rival  Austria. 

So,  in  1866,  Prussia  deliberately  brought  about 
a  war  with  Austria,  and  by  force  of  arms  the  Prus- 
sian octopus  grabbed  Holstein  as  well  as  Schleswig 
and  Lauenburg,  annexed  Hanover  and  several 
Duchies,  excluded  Austria  from  Germany  and 
made  herself  the  head  of  the  new  North  German 
Confederation  with  its  King  as  the  President  and 
Commander-in-Chief  of  all  the  armies,  as  he  is  now 
the  Emperor  and  supreme  war-lord  of  the  Imperial 
Federation.     "Was  wir  brauchen,  wir  nehmen." 

But  Prussia  wanted  still  more.  She  wanted  to 
strengthen  her  power  by  bringing  into  the  Confed- 
eration which  she  ruled  the  South  German  States. 
This  could  only  be  done  by  a  war  which  would  en- 
tangle these  states  with  which  an  offensive  and  de- 
fensive military  alliance  had  been  made. 


80  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

So  in  1870,  by  falsifying  a  telegram,  a  quarrel 
was  deliberately  forced  upon  France  and  by  force 
of  arms  Alsace  and  Lorraine  were  taken,  and  the 
South  German  States  fell  into  the  Prussian  net — 
the  Confederation,  which  now  became  the  German 
Imperial  Federation  with  the  Prussian  King  as 
Emperor  instead  of  President.  "Was  wir  brau- 
chen,  wir  nehmen." 

In  1879  Germany  wanted  to  mobilize  the  mili- 
taristic forces  of  the  central  empires  into  one  great 
machine  by  forming  an  offensive  as  well  as  a  defen- 
sive alliance  with  Austria — thus  holding  the  threat 
of  the  Prussianized  German  machine  over  the  rest 
of  Continental  Europe  to  enforce  the  Prussian 
Will.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  without  this  alliance 
the  present  war  would  have  been  impossible.  As 
a  reaction  to  it — a  counter-force — this  alliance  di- 
rectly created  the  Dual  Entente  of  France  and 
Russia. 

In  1883  the  dual  alliance  of  Germany. and  Aus- 
tria became  the  triple  Alliance,  Italy  joining  for 
defensive  purposes  only,  and  England,  France  and 
Kussia  were  later  compelled  to  answer  it  by  the 
Triple  Entente. 

In  1897  Germany  wanted  a  colony  in  China;  so 
she  simply  took  Kiao-chau  by  threat  of  war,  claim- 
ing it  as  an  indemnity  for — what?,  just  the  murder 
of  two  missionaries.    That  was  the  Prussian  Will. 

In  1898  the  Kaiser  wanted  the  Philippines,  as 
is  generally  believed.  At  any  rate  he  sent  the 
German  Admiral  Diedrich  to  Manila  Bay  to  inter- 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     81 

fere  with  Dewey  in  the  blockade  and  attempted  to 
form  a  European  coalition  against  the  United 
States  to  intervene  in  our  war  with  Spain.  In  con- 
sequence of  Diedrich's  interference  we  were  brought 
to  the  brink  of  war  with  Germany.  War  was  pre- 
vented not  by  notes  but  by  Dewey's  threat  to  fire 
upon  the  German  fleet  and  by  Captain  Chichester 
of  the  English  navy  ranging  his  vessel  alongside  of 
Dewey.  The  European  coalition  against  the 
United  States  was  blocked  by  England  which  re- 
fused to  join. 

Germany's  ambition  was  revealed  by  the  Kaiser's 
remark:  "If  I  had  had  a  larger  fleet  I  would  have 
taken  Uncle  Sam  by  the  scrufF  of  the  neck."  * 

In  1902  he  thought  he  had  another  chance  to  take 
"Uncle  Sam  by  the  scruff  of  the  neck"  and  test 
the  Monroe  Doctrine.  But  this  time  Roosevelt 
thwarted  the  Prussian  Will.  To  collect  some 
money  claims  against  Venezuela,  Germany,  having 
sent  war  vessels  to  that  country,  threatened  to  bom- 
bard Venezuelan  ports  and  occupy  the  territory  in 
defiance  of  our  Monroe  Doctrine.  President 
Roosevelt  sent  for  the  German  Ambassador  at 
Washington  and  told  him  that  unless  Germany 
withdrew  her  fleet  in  ten  days  he  would  send  Dewey 
with  the  American  fleet  to  protect  Venezuela 
against  German  encroachments.  At  the  end  of  a 
week  Germany  had  made  no  reply.  President 
Roosevelt  then  said  in  substance  to  the  Ambassa- 
dor:    "I  said  ten  days:  I  now  make  it  nine."    In 

*  Cf.     The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser,  p.  153. 


82  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

thirty-six  hours  the  Kaiser  withdrew  his  fleet,  t  The 
German  Will  to  Conquer  came  in  contact  with  the 
American  will  to  Defend  and  the  German  Will 
succumbed.  And  it  is  well  for  all  Americans  to  re- 
member that  there  was  no  war. 

In  1905  Germany  entered  into  a  diplomatic  con- 
troversy with  France  demanding  an  interest  in  Mo- 
rocco, which  really  did  not  concern  her  excepting 
on  the  doctrine  "Was  wir  brauchen,  wir  nehmen." 
A  conference  known  as  the  Algeciras  conference 
was  held.  Germany's  argument  was,  yield  what 
we  want  or — war !  That  meant  a  general  European 
war,  just  such  a  war  as  we  have  to-day.  France 
yielded  to  save  the  world  from  a  catastrophy  like 
the  present  one  but  was  left  humiliated  with  the 
resignation  of  her  Minister  for  Foreign  Affairs, 
Delcasse,  demanded  by  Germany. 

In  1907  at  the  Hague  conference  the  United 
States,  England  and  France  pledged  themselves 
in  discussion  to  the  principle  of  disarmament,  but 
Germany  let  it  be  known  that  she  would  leave  the 
conference  if  the  question  of  disarmament  was 
pressed.  And  the  German  military  machine  re- 
mained intact  to  threaten  the  world. 

The  next  year,  in  1908,  Germany,  disregarding 
the  treaty  of  Berlin  of  1878  and  the  treaty  of  Lon- 
don of  1871,  boldly  threatened  war  if  Russia  did 
not  back  down  and  assent  to  the  annexation  of  Bos- 
nia and  Hertzogovina  by  Austria.    Russia,  to  avoid 

■f  Life  of  John  Hay  (Vol.  II,  appendix,  2nd  Edition),  by  W.  R. 
Thayer. 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace    83 

a  European  conflagration,  as  France  had  done  in 
1905,  backed  down  but  announced,  "never  again!" 

Three  years  later,  in  1911,  the  Morocco  question 
was  raised  again  with  France,  and  Germany  to  en- 
force her  wants  by  threat  of  war — which  again 
meant  a  general  European  war, — sent  the  warship 
Panther  to  Agadir.  But  this  time  England  came 
to  the  support  of  France  and  mobilized  her  fleet. 
The  GeiTnan  warship  Pantlier  was  withdrawn, 
but  Germany  never  recovered  from  the  humiliation 
to  her  pride  of  having  to  put  her  mailed  fist  in  her 
pocket  and  sheathe  her  shining  sword  in  its  scab- 
bard. 

In  1913  Germany  made  a  secret  proposal  to  the 
Prime  Minister  of  Italy,  Giolitti,  to  join  her  with 
Austria  to  make  the  same  attack  as  she  did  in  1914 
and  partition  Serbia  between  the  three  countries. 
Italy,  to  her  credit,  refused. 

In  1914  Germany  secretly  again  entered  into  a 
conspiracy  with  Austria  to  attack  little  Serbia,  re- 
duce her  to  a  condition  of  vassalage,  and  extend  the 
German  hegemony  of  "JNIittel-Europa"  through 
the  Balkans  to  Constantinople.  Militarism  refused 
arbitration,  it  refused  conciliation,  it  refused  a  con- 
ference and  it  refused  peace.  Her  will  alone  must 
be  accepted.  The  European  war  resulted.  The 
violation  of  Belgium  I  need  not  refer  to. 

These  are  some  of  the  more  blatant  examples  of 
Prussian  methods  of  domination  and  extending  her 
empire  and  leadership  by  military  force.  For  this 


84  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

purpose,  as  every  one  knows,  the  most  powerful  mil- 
itary organization  the  world  has  ever  seen,  perfect 
in  every  detail,  was  built  up. 

But  an  army  was  not  enough  to  enforce  the  ideals 
of  militarism. 

Not  satisfied  with  her  Continental  aspirations,  an 
ambition  for  colonial  possessions  and  to  become  a 
World  Power  was  fomented  by  the  Pan-Germans 
with  the  Kaiser  as  their  agent  and  became  one  of 
the  ideals  of  the  German  national  consciousness. 
But  it  was  too  late  to  acquire  colonies  peacefully 
as  the  lands  of  the  world,  justly  or  unjustly,  had 
already  been  absorbed.  It  was  necessary  therefore 
to  take  them  by  force  from  Great  Britain,  or 
France,  or  other  nations.  So  in  1897  a  naval  pro- 
gram was  entered  upon,  the  ulterior  design  being 
to  wrest  a  "place  in  the  sun"  from  mbre  fortunate 
and  forehanded  nations,  particularly  Great  Britain. 
And  since  that  date  Germany  has  endeavored  to 
outbuild  Great  Britain,  hoping  some  day — await- 
ing "The  Day"  when  she  would  take  what  she 
wanted  from  the  British  Empire.  "The  ocean 
teaches  us,"  said  the  Kaiser,  "that  on  its  waves  and 
on  its  most  distant  shores  no  great  decision  can 
any  longer  take  place  without  Germany  and  with- 
out the  German  Emperor." 

The  unremitting  pursuance  of  such  policies  by 
Bismarck  and  his  successors  has  been  made  easy  by, 
first,  the  autocratic  constitution  and  character  of 
the  Prussian  and  the  Imperial  systems  of  govern- 
ment bordering  on  absolutism;  and  second,  by  the 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     85 

creation  of  a  national  consciousness,  a  political  re- 
ligion, brought  into  being  through  the  systematic 
organized  education  of  the  dominant  castes  and 
classes  of  Germany.  Under  the  first  the  Imperial 
system  is  substantially  a  continuation  of  the  Prus- 
sian system  before  the  Federalization  of  the  Ger- 
man States  in  1871 ;  the  Imperial  Federation  is 
dominated  by  Prussia;  the  Government  is  an  au- 
tocracy with  the  power  in  the  hands  of  the  Kaiser; 
the  Chancellor,  appointed  by  the  Kaiser,  is  respon- 
sible to  him  alone  and  not  to  the  Reichstag,  or  even 
to  the  Bundesrath ;  the  Kaiser  may  be,  and,  practi- 
cally, William  II.  is,  his  own  Chancellor  and  deter- 
mines the  policies  of  the  Empire;  the  German 
Reichstag,  aside  from  voting  supplies,  is  little  more 
than  a  debating  body ;  the  army,  not  public  opinion, 
is,  to  use  the  words  of  the  Kaiser,  "the  pillar  of  the 
Empire" ;  the  government  in  practice  is  the  Kaiser 
and  those  responsible  to  him,  not  the  Parliament; 
the  representatives  of  the  people  have  little  or  noth- 
ing to  say  in  formulating  the  policies  of  the  Em- 
pire and,  if  they  had,  it  would  not  make  much  prac- 
tical difference  because,  owing  to  the  inequitable 
distribution  of  seats  in  Parliament  without  relation 
to  the  present  distribution  of  the  population,  the 
voters  are  deprived  of  just  proportionate  represen- 
tation. 

By  this  system,  obviously,  power  is  almost  wholly 
in  the  hands  of  the  administration,  while  the  leg- 
islative bodies  are  of  little  account  beyond  what 
comes  from  the  power  of  criticism  and  agitation. 


86  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Democracy  has  no  place  in  the  Geraian  system. 

By  the  second  ch'cumstance  I  have  just  referred 
to — the  systematic  education  of  the  people — that 
collective  state  of  mind  I  mentioned  some  time  back, 
has  been  created  in  the  dominant  classes.  This  has 
become  the  imponderable  force  behind  militarism. 
Indeed  it  may  be  said  that  Prussian  militarism  is 
only  the  expression  of  this  imponderable,  the  ma- 
chinery it  employs  to  fulfil  its  will.  This  impon- 
derable has  become,  through  a  widespread  propa- 
ganda, fostered  by  the  Government,  a  system  of 
ideals  of  the  classes  known  as  Das  Deutschtum  and 
embodied  in  the  policies  f  oiTnulated  by  the  doctrines 
of  Pan-Germanism.  It  is  customary  to  lay  all  the 
blame  for  Prussian  militarism  upon  the  Kaiser,  the 
ruling  classes  and  the  so-called  military  autocracy. 
But  it  is  difficult  to  say  how  far  these  castes  have 
independently  determined  Gej^"man  policies  and  how 
far  they  themselves  are  only  puppets  and  dupes  of 
their  own  propagandism.  That  the  Kaiser  is  re- 
sponsible for  the  creation  of  a  military  caste  by 
which  he  has  surrounded  himself,  there  would  seem 
to  be  no  manner  of  doubt.  And  it  now  seems 
equally  clear  that  this  creation  of  his  hands — often 
likened  to  the  Frankenstein  of  story — in  the  time 
of  the  world-crisis  rose  up  and  overpowered  him. 
But  beyond  and,  I  think  we  can  with  accuracy  say, 
above  the  military  caste  is  that  great  imponderable 
urge  of  the  dominating  consciousness  of  the  Ger- 
manic people — Das  Deutschtum:  A  Will  to  dom- 
inate all  other  peoples,  to  extend  the  German  idea 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     87 

— Weltmacht,  Weltmarkt,  Weltkultiir — through- 
out the  world.  A  state  of  mind,  originating  with 
the  philosophers  and  then  taught  by  the  professors 
and  intellectuals,  under  the  tutelage  or  direction 
of  the  State,  the  Kaiser  himself,  his  ministers  and 
the  members  of  the  bureaucracy  became  first  its 
pupils  and  its  victims  and  then,  inspired  by  its  ob- 
sessing delusions,  its  exponents  and  administrators. 
The  military  caste,  created  for  the  purpose,  became 
the  willing  instrument  of  execution.  But  before 
the  world  upon  the  German  State  alone,  in  com- 
plete possession  of  all  the  functions  of  govern- 
ment, of  administration,  of  direction  of  policies  and 
power  to  execute,  rests  the  full  responsibility  for 
all  its  actions.  Yet  in  this  analysis  we  see  what 
have  been  in  the  words  of  the  Allies  "the  forces 
which  have  constituted  a  perpetual  menace  to  the 
nations." 

I  have  rehearsed  all  these  well-known  German 
activities  since  1864,  the  fundamental  principles  and 
forces  of  the  German  system  of  government  and  its 
methods  of  carrying  into  effect  its  policies,  because 
there  is  always  danger  when  using  an  abstract  term 
of  getting  away  from  the  underlying  things  for 
which  it  stands,  and,  in  this  case,  the  ugly  things 
for  which  Prussian  militarism  stands.  Prussian 
militarism  stands  for  a  theory  of  government,  an 
attitude  of  mind,  political  ideals,  and  very  definite, 
concrete  political  and  military  forces  and  methods 
of  using  them. 


88  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

The  world  has  been  shocked  by  the  sinking  of  the 
Lusitania,  of  the  Sussex  and  a  large  number  of 
other  merchant  ships  without  warning;  by  the  bom- 
bardment from  the  air  and  sea  of  open  towns;  by 
the  violation  of  Belgium  and  Serbia;  by  the  mas- 
sacre of  their  inhabitants  and  of  the  Armenians; 
by  atrocities  unspeakable  and  innumerable;  by  the 
wanton  destruction  of  monuments  of  art,  religion 
and  civilization;  by  the  pillage  of  the  inhabitants 
and  forced  levying  of  fines  on  communities ;  by  the 
deportation  of  the  civil  population  for  purposes  of 
forced  labor;  by  the  judicial  murder  of  Miss  Cavell 
and  Captain  Fryatt;  by  the  general  methods  of 
f rightfulness ;  by  the  adoption  of  the  principle  of 
"military  necessity,"  and  many  other  acts  repug- 
nant to  and  destructive  of  accepted  principles  of 
civilization.  But  these,  however  wrong  and  shock- 
ing to  our  sensibilities,  are  only  particular  applica- 
tions of  the  Prussian  system  of  government  and  its 
principles  of  militarism.  So  long  as  that  system, 
in  which  the  rights  of  small  states,  international 
law  and  the  laws  of  humanity  have  no  place,  is  tol- 
erated by  the  world  there  is  no  logical  reason  to 
revolt  against  its  application. 

So  long  as  the  world  recognizes  Germany  as  one 
of  the  family  of  civilized  nations,  holds  diplomatic 
and  social  intercourse  with  her,  trades  with  her, 
lends  to  her,  makes  treaties  with  her,  admits  her  to 
fellowship  in  the  humane  society  of  mankind  know- 
ing her  to  be  what  she  is,  the  world  cannot  in  reason 
object  to  her  barbarism.    If  we  accept  the  system 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     89 

why  object  to  its  application? 

In  view,  then,  of  all  these  considerations,  the 
meaning  of  the  Allies  to  every  one,  who  does  not 
shut  his  eyes  to  facts,  is  perfectly  clear  when  they 
say,  in  their  answer  to  the  Central  Powers,  "No 
peace  is  possible  ...  so  long  as  they  [the  Allies] 
have  not  brought  about  a  settlement  calculated  to 
end  once  and  for  all  forces  which  have  constituted  a 
perpetual  menace  to  the  nations."  And  must  not 
every  "honorable  critic,"  to  whom  Bethmann-Holl- 
weg  has  appealed,  say  that  Lloyd  George  told  the 
truth  when  he  answered,  "Prussia  since  she  got  into 
the  hands  of  that  caste  [the  military  caste]  has  been 
a  bad  neighbor — arrogant,  threatening,  bullying, 
shifting  boundaries  at  her  will,  taking  one  fair  field 
after  another  from  weaker  neighbors  and  adding 
them  to  her  own  dominions,  ostentatiously  piling 
up  weapons  of  offense,  ready  on  a  moment's  notice 
to  be  used." 

There  also  can  be  little  doubt  left  in  the  mind  as 
to  what  the  Allies  mean  by  "Guaranties  for  a  last- 
ing peace,"  when  they  demand  "a  settlement  cal- 
culated ...  to  afford  the  only  effective  guarantee 
for  the  future  security  of  the  world." 

To  guarantee  lasting  peace,  as  well  as  bring  pres- 
ent peace,  as  has  been  stated  over  and  over  again 
by  responsible  ministers  of  the  Allied  governments, 
by  their  press,  by  publicists  and  by  open  expres- 
sions of  public  opinion,  Prussian  militarism  and  all 
that  it  stands  for  must  go. 


90  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Well,  that  is  all  very  fine,  but  what  guarantees 
then  can  be  given  for  the  elimination  of  Prussian 
militarism?  Neither  in  answer  to  Germany  or  to 
Mr.  Wilson  have  the  Allies  consented  to  enter  into 
details  and  state  what  they  demand  for  its  accom- 
plishment. We  are  left,  therefore,  to  surmise  and 
to  our  own  judgment. 

So  far  as  Prussian  militarism  is  a  state  of  mind 
and  so  far  as  it  is  a  system  of  ideals  and  aspirations 
and  will,  these  being  elements  of  a  national  con- 
sciousness, and  therefore  psychological,  it  must  be 
admitted  that  they  cannot  be  directly  destroyed  by 
military  force.  Indirectly,  however,  such  a  result 
might  ensue  from  a  victorious  outcome  of  the  war 
for  the  Allies.  It  may  well  come  about  that  with 
the  object  lesson  of  defeat  before  them  a  new  light 
will  come  to  German  statesmen,  the  military  caste 
and  the  deluded  victims  of  the  propaganda  for 
"Deutschland  iiber  Alles."  It  is  quite  within  the 
bounds  of  possibility  that,  without  giving  up  their 
pride  of  race  and  Kultur  but  realizing  at  last 
whither  Prussian  militarism  has  led  them — that  in- 
stead of  a  "place  in  the  sun"  they  have  been  led 
into  the  dark  shadow  of  a  world  hostility,  their  colo- 
nies gone,  their  future  mortgaged  by  billions  of 
debt,  millions  of  their  sons  killed  or  maimed  for 
life,  morally  boycotted  by  nearly  all  the  people  they 
expected  to  conquer  or  whose  rights  they  flaunted 
—they  will  see  that  their  ideals  are  incapable  of 
realization  by  force  of  arms  and  that  militarism 
doesn't  pay.     And  in  such  a  situation  the  will  to 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     91 

power  may  well  give  way  to  will  to  peace. 

However  that  may  be,  so  far  as  Prussian  mili- 
tarism is  a  system  of  government  which  has  cre- 
ated, instigated  and  put  its  ideals  into  effect 
through  the  autocratic  will  'of  a  limited  caste  mak- 
ing use  of  a  huge  military  organization,  it  can  be 
destroyed  by  destroying  the  political  power  of  that 
caste  and  disarming  the  organization  at  its  disposal. 

It  is  incredible,  therefore,  that  if  the  Allies 
achieve  military  victory — obtain  "Peace  with  Vic- 
tory"— and  have  the  power  to  impose  their  will  by 
force,  they  will  not,  as  their  first  step,  insist  upon 
the  elimination  of  the  House  of  HohenzoUern. 
Righteousness,  justice,  the  judgment  of  "the  su- 
preme court  of  civilization,"  the  public  opinion  of 
the  civilized  world  call  aloud  for  it.  That  the  Ger- 
man Kaiser,  the  bully  of  Europe,  who  for  twenty- 
eight  years,  ever  since  he  came  to  the  throne  has 
been  the  responsible  promoter  of  the  war  spirit 
and  Prussian  aggression,  the  creator  and  patron  of 
the  Prussian  military  caste  and  militarism,  who  has 
used  his  great  power  to  incite  ideas  of  world  domin- 
ion and  ruthlessness  amongst  his  people — civilians 
and  soldiers,  who  has  throttled  the  aspirations  of 
German  Democracy,  should  be  permitted  to  con- 
tinue in  his  career  would  be  a  world  calamity. 

If  in  the  event  of  victory  the  Allies  shall  use 
their  military  force  to  rid  the  world  of  the  power 
for  evil  of  the  House  of  HohenzoUern  they  would 
be  supported  by  the  gratitude  of  the  world. 

A  New  England  Puritan  divine  once  delivered 


92  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

himself  of  this  prayer  in  the  Old  South  Meeting 
House  of  Boston,  "Oh,  Lord,  it  is  not  for  us  to 
advise;  but  if  a  storm  should  come,  and  should  de- 
stroy the  enemy's  fleet,  Thine  would  be  the  glory 
and  we  should  be  satisfied."  *  And  so  we  along 
with  the  rest  of  the  neutral  world  may  say  to  the 
Entente  Allies,  "It  is  not  for  us  to  advise,  but  if 
in  your  power  and  military  victory  you  should  rid. 
the  world  of  the  House  of  HohenzoUern  and  its 
military  caste,  thine  would  be  the  glory  and  we 
should  be  satisfied." 

That  this  is  one  of  the  purposes  of  the  Allies  and 
that  it  is  one  of  those  "details"  which  they  have  very 
respectfully  said  to  our  Government  "will  not  be 
made  known,"  one  does  not  need  to  be  very  deep 
seeing  to  guess.  Probably  another  of  those  details 
included  in  their  laudable  object  is  to  see  to  it  that 
there  shall  be  brought  about  a  limitation  of  the  pre- 
rogatives of  the  future  Kaiser  so  that  he  would  be 
reduced  to  a  position  in  the  government  similar  to 
that  of  the  King  of  England  and  the  sovereigns  of 
other  parliament arily  governed  states;  that  is,  a 
true  democratic  government,  with  a  ministry  re- 
sponsible to  parliament  and  the  people. 

It  would  seem  to  be  useless,  when  expecting  a 
guaranty  of  lasting  peace,  to  change  only  the  per- 

*  It  may  interest  the  curious  to  know  that  this  was  a  historical  epi- 
sode commemorated  by  Longfellow  in  his  "Ballad  of  the  French 
Fleet — October,  1746."  It  so  happened  that  a  storm  did  come  and  did 
destroy  the  enemy's  fleet;  and  the  good  people  of  Boston  were  satis- 
fied, believing  it  to  be  a  Divine  intervention  in  response  to  their 
worthy's  prayer. 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     93 

sonnel  of  a  government  and  leave  unmolested  the 
autocratic  system  of  which  any  particular  ruler  is 
the  exponent.  It  is  the  system  that  is  the  menace 
to  the  world.  Only  in  the  democratization  of  the 
imperial  system  does  the  future  hold  out  a  hope  of 
a  will  to  peace. 

To  the  objection  that  to  impose  by  force  a  form 
of  government  upon  the  German  people  is  to  in- 
terfere in  the  internal  affairs  of  a  people  and  vio- 
lates one  of  the  very  principles  for  which  the  Allies 
are  contending — the  right  of  each  people  to  gov- 
ern themselves  and  work  out  their  own  destinies 
in  their  own  way — the  answer  is  obvious.  Such 
measures  as  I  have  imagined  need  not  be  brought 
to  fulfilment  by  direct  forceful  imposition.  In  the 
event  of  military  victory  the  Allies  owe  to  those 
who  have  died  and  those  who  have  suffered  in  the 
cause  of  Liberty  that  they  shall  not  have  died  and 
suffered  in  vain;  and  they  owe  to  the  generations 
that  are  to  come  that  they  shall  not  have  to  undergo 
the  terrible  sacrifices  which  this  generation  has  ex- 
perienced. They  may  rightly,  therefore,  insist  that 
they  will  make  no  terms  until  the  German  people 
themselves  come  to  the  council  chamber  of  peace 
with  a  form  of  government  which  shall  in  itself  of- 
fer the  same  guaranty  for  the  future  that  the  de- 
mocracy of  the  world  offers  to  them.  The  guaran- 
ties must  be  mutual  and  equal  on  both  sides,  and 
they  are  not  mutual  and  equal  when  on  the  one 
side  the  terms  are  guaranteed  by  a  democracy  based 
on  and  seeking  the  "natural  and  inherent  rights  of 


94  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

mankind,"  and  on  the  other  by  a  Prussian  autoc- 
racy recognizing  no  such  rights,  nor  international 
law,  the  sanctity  of  treaties  and  the  laws  of  human- 
ity, but  only  Absolute  Power  and  Will  to  conquest. 
No  terms  of  peace  agreed  upon  between  Powers 
with  such  different  ideals  can  be  lasting.  The  En- 
tente Allies  may  well  insist,  they  owe  it  as  an  ob- 
ligation to  the  dead  and  to  the  living,  to  the  great 
cause  of  civilization  to  insist,  that  there  shall  be  no 
peace  until  Germany  can  enter  the  council  chamber 
and  say,  "We  have  put  our  house  in  order,  we  have 
reconstructed  our  government  and  are  prepared  to 
be  admitted  to  the  democracy  of  the  world."  Amer- 
ica, although  at  the  moment  still  a  neutral  in  war 
but,  having  broken  off  diplomatic  relations  with 
Germany,  not  a  neutral  in  spirit,  can  not  only  sym- 
pathize with  but  is  interested  in  this  insistence. 

In  principle  this  was  the  stand  taken  by  the 
North  after  the  defeat  of  the  armies  of  the  South  in 
our  civil  war.  As  a  guaranty  of  the  maintenance 
of  the  principles  for  which  the  war  was  fought  vol- 
untary "reconstruction"  of  State  constitutions  was 
required  for  admission  to  the  family  of  states  united 
on  terms  of  equality. 

In  a  world  of  democracy  we  may  not  impose 
upon  our  neighbor  how  he  shall  order  his  own  house, 
but  we  may  say  to  him  we  will  not  enter  his  home 
nor  shall  he  enter  ours,  we  will  boycott  him,  isolate 
and  ostracize  him  until  he  chains  up  his  bulldog, 
gives  us  the  same  guaranties  for  safe  conduct  that 
we  give  to  him. 


Prussian  3Iilitarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     95 

Peace  by  Negotiation  Impossible  at  This  Time 

When,  then,  you  come  to  ask  what  do  the  Allies 
mean  when  they  demand  that  Germany  shall  give 
assurances  for  future  peace,  when  they  declare  they 
will  not  make  peace  "so  long  as  they  have  not 
brought  about  a  settlement  calculated  to  end  once 
and  for  all  forces  which  have  constituted  a  perpet- 
ual menace  to  the  nations  and  to  afford  the  only 
effective  guarantee  for  the  future  security  of  the 
world,"  we  can  only  think  along  the  lines  the  pres- 
ent situation  imposes  upon  us.  We  must,  however, 
remember  that  the  Allies  cannot  be  asked  in  the 
present  uncertain  stage  of  the  war  to  define  con- 
cretely and  explicitly  the  exact  character  and  de- 
tails of  the  "settlement"  they  broadly  outline.  Tac- 
tical considerations  forbid,  before  victory  is  actu- 
ally achieved,  and  it  would  be  foolish  to  cross  the 
bridges  before  they  are  reached.  But  if  such  "as- 
surances" as  I  have  imagined  be  required,  is  it  con- 
ceivable that,  at  a  conference  to  negotiate  peace 
around  a  table,  the  House  of  Hohenzollern  and  the 
Prussian  military  caste  will  agree  to  eliminate  them- 
selves? Or,  if  this  demand  be  waived,  that  they 
would  or  could  surrender  their  ideals  and  will  and 
state  of  mind  and  policies  of  militarism,  much  less 
their  military  organization? 

Here  seems  to  be  an  insuperable  difficulty  to 
peace  without  victory — to  peace  by  negotiation. 
In  the  midst  of  negotiation  there  emerges  the  irrec- 
oncilable conflict  of  ideals^ — the  ideals  of  Prussian 


96  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

autocracy  and  Prussian  militarism  manifesting 
themselves  through  the  Will  to  dominate  the  world 
by  force,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  ideals  of  democ- 
racy with  respect  for  the  rights  and  privileges  and 
independence  of  all  nations,  great  and  small,  on  the 
other.  One  of  these  must  give  way,  or  else  all  na- 
tions must  continue  to  live  armed  against  one  an- 
other as  in  the  past.  For  the  democratic  ideals  to 
give  way  means  the  regression  of  democracy  and 
the  return  to  that  order  of  things  out  of  which  civ- 
ilization has  been  progressively  but  slowly  emerg- 
ing during  the  past  one  hundred  years.  For  the 
Prussian  ideals  to  give  way  means  the  self-elim- 
ination of  the  ruling  classes  in  Germany  and  sub- 
ordinating themselves  to  the  will  of  a  reconstructed 
German  people.  It  would  seem  then  that  the  set- 
tlement of  this  conflict  can  only  come  by  the  arbi- 
trament of  the  sword,  if  it  is  to  come  at  all  out  of 
this  war. 

A  Conflict  Between  Two  Principles  of 
Government 

It  is  well  for  us  to  face  the  fact,  for  all  neutrals 
to  face  the  fact,  that  in  this  great  European  war 
we  have  a  conflict  between  two  principles  of  gov- 
ernment, between  two  civilizations:  One  founded 
upon  the  principle  of  the  inherent  and  natural  rights 
of  mankind;  the  other  founded  on  the  principle  of 
militarism. 

According  to  the  one,  all  men  possess  natural 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace     97 

and  inlierent  rights  which  no  government  and  no 
majorities  can  take  away;  it  maintains,  besides,  that 
the  rights  and  privileges  of  all  nations  and  all  peo- 
ples shall  be  respected  by  all  others ;  that  all  nations 
and  all  peoples  shall  be  allowed  peacefully  to  work 
out  their  destinies  in  their  own  way  so  long  as  they 
do  not  infringe  upon  the  rights  of  others ;  that  they 
shall  not  be  dominated  and  menaced  by  the  aggres- 
sive covetousness  of  another  nation  determined  to 
impose  its  arbitrary  will  by  military  force. 

According  to  the  other,  the  will  of  the  state  is 
the  supreme  will  and  the  state  that  has  the  will  and 
the  power  has  the  right  to  take  what  it  wants  by 
force  and  to  use  any  methods  which  it  deems  neces- 
sity requires. 

This  war  is  undoubtedly  the  culmination  of  an 
irrepressible  conflict  of  ideals  that  has  been  brew- 
ing for  years. 

So  long  as  these  two  ideals,  behind  which  were 
mighty  forces,  persisted,  those  forces  sooner  or  later 
were  bound  to  clash  in  war.  We  can  see  now  that 
the  Serbian  question  was  only  the  occasion  that 
brought  them  into  conflict.  Lincoln  said  that  this 
American  government  could  not  "endure  peiTQa- 
nently  half  slave  and  half  free.  ...  It  will  be- 
come all  one  thing  or  all  the  other."  Likewise  I  do 
not  believe  that  the  nations  of  the  world  can  en- 
dure permanently  half  militaristic  and  half  peace- 
ful. They  will  become  all  one  thing  or  all  the  other. 
If  one  or  more  hold  to  the  principles  of  militarism, 
the  war  has  shown  that  all  the  others  must  create 


08  The  Creed  of  Deutschturrt 

and  maintain  mighty  military  establishments  to 
enforce  their  rights.  Limitation  of  armaments  and 
a  league  to  enforce  arbitration  and  conciliation  be- 
fore a  declaration  of  war  (for  that  is  what  the  pro- 
posed "League  to  Enforce  Peace"  really  is)  can 
modify  the  evil  of  militarism  but  cannot  cure  it. 

Is  America,  then,  "not  concerned  with  the  causes 
and  objects  of  the  war"  as  has  been  said?  On  the 
contrary,  America  cannot,  I  believe,  look  with  in- 
difference on  the  outcome  of  this  war,  as  to  which 
ideal  shall  triumph.  If  the  Prussian  ideal  shall  sur- 
vive, we  shall  of  course  have  to  maintain  great  arm- 
aments in  our  own  defense.  But  that  is  only  a  ma- 
terial interest.  What  concerns  us  greatly  more 
are  the  moral  principles  involved — ^the  possible  tri- 
umph of  principles  utterly  hostile  and  abhorrent  to 
our  system  of  government  and  the  principles  upon 
which  it  is  founded. 

The  fundamental  principle  underlying  this  con- 
flict of  ideals  is  one  of  right  and  wrong.  The  real 
issue  is  a  moral  one.  And  I  do  not  believe  that  this 
government  or  our  people  can  be  indifferent  to  that 
issue.  I  do  not  believe  that  when  it  is  thoroughly 
understood  our  people  will  be  indifferent. 

I  am  not  referring  to  the  methods  of  carrying 
on  the  war  pursued  by  Germany  and  her  allies — 
methods  which  have  broken  the  international  laws 
of  nations  and  the  moral  laws  of  humanity.  These 
are,  I  repeat,  but  particular  applications  of  the 
Prussian  system  of  government  and  therefore  of  a 
militarism  which  does  not  accept  the  laws  of  hu- 


Prussian  Militarism  and  a  Lasting  Peace    99 

manity. 

From  the  American  point  of  view  that  system 
is  morally  wrong  because  it  violates  the  natural  and 
inherent  rights  of  mankind.  And  therefore  this 
government  and  the  American  people  cannot  be  in- 
different as  to  how  this  war  is  settled,  whether  Prus- 
sian militarism  is  left  free  or  whether  it  is  destroyed. 
If  it  be  left  free  the  conflict  of  ideals  and  princi- 
ples will  still  remain  to  threaten  civilization.  Lin- 
coln's great  antagonist,  Douglas,  said  that  he  did 
not  "care  whether  slavery  be  voted  up  or  voted 
down"  so  long  as  the  political  conflict  over  the  ex- 
tension of  slavery  into  the  territories  was  settled. 
But  Lincoln  refused  to  follow  Douglas  and  accept 
a  policy  as  a  settlement  which  was  not  based  upon 
the  principle  that  slavery  was  wrong.  For  he  held 
that  we  could  not  justifiably  withhold  the  legal 
right  of  the  South  to  extend  their  system  excepting 
on  the  ground  that  it  was  wrong.  So  now,  I  believe, 
that  we  cannot  logically  oppose  the  applications 
of  the  Prussian  system,  when  they  affect  only  the 
lives  and  property  and  material  rights  of  other  na- 
tions, excepting  on  the  ground  that  the  Prussian 
system  is  morally  wrong.  Our  Government,  there- 
fore, cannot  be  indifferent  to  the  terms  on  which 
peace  is  made.  To  paraphrase  the  words  of  Lin- 
coln: we  want  and  must  have  a  national  policy  as 
to  Prussian  militarism  which  deals  with  it  as  being 
a  wrong.  Whoever  would  prevent  militarism  be- 
coming international  and  perpetual  yields  all  when 
he  yields  to  a  policy  which  treats  it  either  as  being 


100  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

right  or  as  being  a  matter  of  indifference. 

The  people  of  the  Allied  Nations  have  set  them- 
selves the  noble  task  of  destroying  Prussian  mili- 
tarism. So  long  as  they  are  willing  to  make  the  aw- 
ful sacrifices  necessary  to  this  end,  we,  who,  so  long 
as  we  are  neutral,  are  not  called  upon  to  make  any 
but  insignificant  sacrifices  of  a  material  nature, 
should  see  to  it  that  we  do  not  hamper  them  in  their 
noble  purpose;  and,  if  we  shall  be  drawn  into  the 
war  and  become  one  of  the  allies,  should  lend  all  our 
resources  and  all  our  power  towards  the  accom- 
plishment of  that  task.  We  would  not  be  human  if 
we  did  not  shrink  from  the  spectacle  of  the  appal- 
ling loss  of  human  life  that  this  purpose  entails,  but 
we  should  not  forget  the  admonition  of  a  celebrated 
humane  and  manly  divine,  James  Martineau: 

The  reverence  for  human  life  is  carried  to  an  immoral 
idolatry  when  it  is  held  more  sacred  than  justice  and 
right,  and  when  the  spectacle  of  blood  becomes  more 
horrible  than  the  sight  of  desolating  tyrannies  and  tri- 
umphant hypocrisies. 


THE   PSYCHOLOGY   OF   THE   KAISER 


THE  PSYCHOLOGY  OF  THE  KAISER* 

[This  essay  has  been  published  also  in  French,  German 
and  Japanese  translations  and  an  incomplete  edition  was 
published  independently  in  England.  The  Japanese 
translation  was  undertaken  by  the  personal  direction  of 
Marquis  Okuma,  when  Prime  Minister  of  Japan  in  1916. 
This  distinguished  statesman,  becoming  interested  in  some 
of  the  political  questions  raised,  brought  the  book  to  the 
attention  of  His  Majesty  the  Emperor  and  His  Highness 
the  Crown  Prince,  as  noted  in  the  Japanese  edition, 
and  wrote  a  foreword  for  the  same.  Professor  Shiozawa, 
whom  I  had  the  pleasure  of  meeting,  also  wrote  an 
introduction  further  amplifying,  as  he  himself  explains, 
Marquis  Okuma's  views  on  German  polity  and  the  con- 
trasting differences  between  Japanese  and  Geraian  prin- 
ciples of  government.  I  have  thought  that  this  statement 
presenting  the  Japanese  viewpoint  on  some  of  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  government  would  be  of  interest  to 
Americans  and  the  Western  mind  coming,  as  it  does,  from 
such  an  authoritative  source  and  one  so  qualified  to  ex- 
plain Japanese  thought  and  polity.  Therefore  a  trans- 
lation of  Professor  Shiosawa's  introduction  with  Vicount 
Okuma's  foreword  is  included  here  with  the  original  essay. 

Of  particular  interest  is  the  statement  made  by  the 
distinguished  Japanese  statesman,  that  "the  spirit  of 
our  [Japan's]  national  polity  is  fundamentally  different 
from  that  of  Germany,"  although  both  are  monarchical, 
for  that  of  Japan  has  been  "the  harmonious  cooperation 
of  the  Sovereign  and  the  Subject."  And  what  will,  I  be- 
lieve, be  surprising  to  Americans,  "the  Imperial  House- 
hold has,  since  the  days  of  the  gods  (i.e.,  the  prehistoric 

*  First  printed  in  the  New  York  (Sunday)  Times,  May  9,  1915. 
Later  published  in  book  form,  Boston:  Richard  G.  Badger,  1915;  re- 
produced in  this  volume  in  lieu  of  a  second  edition. 

103 


104  The  Creed  of  Deutscktum 

age),  considered  it  its  mission  to  practice,  and  has  con- 
tinually and  consistently  been  practisinj^  what  the  occi- 
dentals would  term  'democratic  principles'.  .  .  .  The 
will  of  the  people  has  always  been  made  the  wall  of  the 
Imperial  Household." 

Marquis  Okuma's  criticisms  of  the  Kaiser  and  Germany 
and  his  general  views  will  also  be  found  to  have  great 
interest  particularly  at  this  time. 

I  trust  that  the  complimentary  allusions  to  the  Amer- 
ican author,  probably  written  only  for  the  Japanese 
public,  will  be  understood  by  the  reader  as  only  ex- 
pressions characteristic  of  that  Japanese  etiquette  which 
is  one  of  the  charms  of  a  people  noted  for  their  courtesy. 
To  delete  them  would  be  an  ungraceful  use  of  the  edi- 
torial prerogative  and  so  I  let  them  stand  as  they  were 
writ. 

January,  1918.— M.  P.] 


FOREWORD   BY 

MARQUIS  OKUMA 

AND   INTRODUCTION    BY 

PROFESSOR  SHIOSAWA 


This  book  had  the  honor  of  being  read  by  His 
Majesty  the  Emperor. 


IS  sir 


This  book  had  the  honor  of  being  read  by  His 


Highness  the  Crown  Prince. 


FOREWORD  BY  MARQUIS  OKUMA 

Criticizing  the  life  of  Napoleon  the  Great,  the 
Kaiser  once  aptly  remarked,  "Alas  for  him!  He 
knew  the  enemy  he  had  to  deal  with,  but  he  did  not 
know  himself.  That  was  the  cause  of  his  final  de- 
feat." Napoleon  himself  confessed  that  he  had 
overestimated  his  own  powers  in  believing  that  he 
was  equal  to  the  task  of  achieving  world  domina- 
tion and  of  making  himself  master  of  a  great  em- 
pire. His  pride,  however,  seemed  to  have  entered 
the  marrow  of  his  life,  for  he  said  in  the  same 
breath,  "The  world  shall  never  look  upon  my  like 
again."  The  well  known  adage  that  there  was 
no  such  word  as  impossible  in  his  dictionaiy,  was 
uttered  by  him  when  he  was  at  the  height  of  his 
self-confidence.  Taking  advantage  of  the  golden 
opportunity  of  the  French  Revolution,  Bonaparte, 
a  native  of  Corsica,  came  to  command  the  popu- 
larity of  the  whole  French  nation.  The  fame  of  his 
army  was  such  that  it  resounded  throughout  the 
length  and  breadth  of  the  entire  world  and  made 
the  whole  of  Europe  tremble  with  fear.  Indeed  his 
genius  seemed  to  have  bordered  on  the  divine.  Who 
would  have  thought  that  he  would  have  to  bury  his 
bones  in  the  lonely  isle  of  St.  Helena?  Such,  how- 
ever, was  his  lot.  Does  not  this  show  that  any  at- 
tempt at  world  domination  must  necessarily  end 

107 


108  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

in  an  empty  dream? 

Having  been  born  in  the  royal  family  of  the  Ho- 
henzollerns,  and  having  been  brought  up  according 
to  the  traditional,  teachings  of  Frederick  the  Great, 
Kaiser  Wilhelm  came  to  believe  that  he  was  a  hero 
beyond  parallel.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether 
his  genius  can  ever  compete  with  that  of  Napoleon. 
Nevertheless  he  came  to  entertain  the  ambition  of 
world  domination,  and  piu'sued  the  traditional  mil- 
itaristic policy  of  Frederick.  Especially  for  the 
last  sixteen  or  seventeen  years  the  Kaiser  has  de- 
voted himself  assiduously  to  the  construction  of  a 
world  empire,  and  he  has  brought  about  the  present 
world  war.  Who  can  say  that  his  fate  will  be  dif- 
ferent from  that  of  his  French  predecessor? 

Pride  goes  before  a  fall,  and  pride  is,  after  all, 
a  sort  of  mental  derangement.  It  is  no  wonder  that 
Dr.  Prince  should  have  directed  his  attention  to 
this  phase  of  the  Kaiser's  psychology.  To  be  proud 
of  one's  powers,  and  to  imagine  the  impossible  as 
within  the  bounds  of  the  possible  is  a  case  of  insan- 
ity. It  is  as  if  a  drunken  man  misbehaves  himself 
under  the  influence  of  liquors.  A  monarch  with 
but  a  brief  history  behind  him,  he  had  the  arro- 
gance to  proclaim  to  the  people:  "The  Imperial 
throne  is  divinely  ordained.  The  Hohenzollerns 
alone  are  entitled  to  it  by  the  special  appointment 
of  Heaven."  He  not  only  tried  eternally  to  pre- 
serve his  autocratic  government  within  his  own  do- 
minion but  also  attempted  to  realize  the  traditional 
ambitions  of  Frederick  the  Great  by  bringing  the 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  109 

whole  world  to  his  feet.  Is  not  this  a  sign  of  his 
mental  derangement  ? 

Although  the  Kaiser  criticized  Napoleon  as  hav- 
ing been  ignorant  of  himself,  yet  it  is  doubtful 
whether  the  Kaiser  is  himself  free  from  such  a 
charge.  The  Book  of  Tactics  says:  "If  one  knows 
both  oneself  and  one's  opponent,  one  is  sure  to  win. 
If  one  knows  oneself  but  not  the  opponent,  one  may 
win  or  lose.  If  one  knows  neither  oneself  nor  the 
opponent  one  is  sure  to  suffer  a  defeat."  If  the 
Kaiser  failed  to  calculate  the  strength  of  England, 
France,  and  Russia,  the  Kaiser  did  not  know  the 
opponent.  If  the  Kaiser  failed  to  perceive  that  the 
strength  of  Germany  was  unequal  to  meet  the  com- 
bined forces  of  the  Allies,  he  did  not  know  himself. 
Thus  if  he  knew  neither  himself  nor  the  enemy,  how 
could  he  escape  the  inevitable  result  as  predicted 
by  the  Chinese  tactician? 

It  was  his  pride  that  brought  him  to  his  present 
extremity.  His  blind  ambitions  deprived  him  of  his 
intelligence.  Fighting,  as  he  does,  for  no  justifiable 
cause,  he  has  defiled  the  dignity  of  his  army.  The 
German  people  who  have  been  enjoying  glorious 
prosperity  since  Frederick  the  Great  by  mobilizing 
the  forces  of  the  whole  Empire,  are  now  dissipating 
all  their  resources,  human  as  well  as  material,  by 
the  mistaken  policy  of  their  leader.  He  is  not  only 
bringing  pain  and  misery  into  the  lives  of  the  peo- 
ple of  all  nationalities,  but  has  brought  his  German 
people  to  the  verge  of  ruin.  Is  this  the  way  to  be 
the  father  of  a  nation?    We  shall  not  wonder  if  the 


110  The  Creed  of  Deutschtwm 

people  desert  him.  The  present  war  will  not  only 
leave  an  uneffaceable  wound  on  the  life  and  civili- 
zation of  the  world  at  large,  but  it  may  also  lose  the 
Kaiser  the  confidence  of  his  people.  This  can  by 
no  means  be  said  to  be  conducive  to  the  interests 
of  the  Kaiser  and  of  the  Hohenzollerns.  If  the 
Kaiser  fails  to  observe  these  plain  truths,  he  is 
justly  open  to  the  charge  of  insanity. 

I  sincerely  hope  that  this  translation  of  Dr. 
Prince's  work  will  serve  as  a  good  lesson  to  the 
proud  and  arrogant. 

Marquis  Okuma. 

December,  1916. 


INTRODUCTION  BY  PROFESSOR  SHIOSAWA 

Last  summer  Dr.  Morton  Prince,  a  noted  Amer- 
ican psychologist,  visited  our  shores.  One  day, 
through  the  introduction  of  Mr.  Miyaoka,  he  had 
an  interview  with  Marquis  Okuma  at  his  Waseda 
residence.  I  was  present  and  had  the  privilege  of 
listening  to  the  interesting  conversation  that  passed 
between  the  host  and  the  guest.  After  a  hearty 
discussion  of  various  subjects,  such  as  the  present 
world  politics,  government,  science,  and  psychol- 
ogy, individual  and  racial,  the  doctor  directed  his 
topics  to  the  discussion  of  the  conditions  in  Ger- 
many, and  especially  of  the  Kaiser  and  his  mili- 
tarism. .  .  .  We  can  well  imagine  the  acuteness 
of  his  observation,  that  penetrates  into  the  very  sore 
spot  in  the  personality  he  dissects.  Incidentally 
it  will  vouch  for  the  value  of  his  work  on  the  psy- 
chology of  the  Kaiser,  of  which  he  was  kind  enough 
to  send  us  a  copy  soon  after  through  Mr.  Miyaoka. 
I  then  read  the  book  to  the  Marquis  and  we  dis- 
cussed the  subject. 

The  Marquis  commented  minutely  on  this  work; 
among  other  things  he  pointed  out  the  fundamental 
differences  that  exist  between  the  spirit  of  our  pol- 
ity and  that  of  Germany  as  elucidated  by  Dr. 
Prince,  the  gist  of  which  was  as  follows: 

"The  form  of  German  polity,  especially  with 

111 


112  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

regard  to  the  basis  and  powers  of  the  Imperial 
throne,  seems  to  resemble  ours  at  first  sight,  but  if 
we  look  a  little  closer  into  its  substance  we  shall 
find  that  the  two  are  diametrically  opposed.  We 
can  well  understand  when  an  American  gentleman 
like  Dr.  Prince  in  reviewing  the  present  German 
monarchial  system  from  his  democratic  standpoint 
points  out  the  incompatibility  of  monarchial  gov- 
ernment with  democratic  principles.  For  there  is 
no  denying  the  fact  that  the  present  German  mon- 
archial principle  has  a  tendency  to  come  into  con- 
flict with  democratic  principles.  We  must  not  for- 
get, however,  that  the  spirit  of  our  national  polity 
is  fundamentally  different  from  that  of  Germany. 
With  us  the  Imperial  Household  has  since  the  days 
of  the  gods  (i.  e.,  the  pre-historic  age)  considered 
it  its  mission  to  practice,  and  has  continually  and 
consistently  been  practicing,  what  the  Occidentals 
would  term  'democratic  principles.'  Thus  the  in- 
terests of  the  Imperial  Household  and  the  interests 
of  the  nation  have  been  inseparably  one,  and  have 
never  been  known  to  come  in  conflict  with  each 
other.  Clear  and  unequivocal  evidence  may  be  said 
to  be  scattered  throughout  every  page  of  our  his- 
tory. Especially  noteworthy  are  the  cases  of  Em- 
peror ISTintoku  and  Emperor  Daigo,  the  former 
shedding  tears  over  the  scanty  smoke  that  ascended 
from  the  roofs,  the  latter  taking  off  his  coat  on  a 
chilly  night  to  share  the  pain  and  suffering  of  the 
poor.  To  say  nothing  of  older  examples  which 
abound  in  our  history,  the  life  and  works  of  Em- 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  113 

peror  Meiji,  the  Founder  of  New  Japan,  are  just  a 
case  in  point.  The  traditional  spirit  of  our  Imper- 
ial Household  is  well  revealed  in  a  letter  to  the  peo- 
ple accompanying  the  famous  Five  Articles,  a  part 
of  which  was  as  follows:  'If  any  one  of  Our  sub- 
jects does  not  get  his  due  at  this  reconstruction  of 
the  entire  government,  it  will  be  Our  fault.  We 
can  be  true  to  Our  heavenly  mission  and  to  the  glor- 
ious precedents  of  Our  forefathers,  only  when  We 
devote  Our  body  and  soul  to  meet  the  present  na- 
tional diffilculties,  and  at  the  head  of  Our  people  at- 
tain meritorious  works  in  the  footsteps  of  Our  an- 
cestors.' 

"Thus  the  harmonious  co-operation  of  the  sov- 
ereign and  the  subject  having  been  the  fundamental 
basis  of  our  national  polity,  no  such  thing  has  ever 
existed  in  our  history  as  a  strife  between  the  Im- 
perial Household  and  the  people.  Look  at  Euro- 
pean history  and  you  will  find  a  series  of  bitter 
strifes  between  Kings  and  subjects,  which  some- 
times unfortunately  led  to  bloodshed.  The  absence 
of  such  separation  of  the  will  of  the  people  from 
that  of  the  sovereign,  and  the  absence  of  any  con- 
flict of  interests  between  the  two,  shows  the  supe- 
riority of  our  polity  in  this  respect.  In  other  words, 
with  us  the  Imperial  Household  has  always  prac- 
ticed democratic  principles,  and  the  will  of  the  peo- 
ple has  always  been  made  the  will  of  the  Imperial 
Household.  This  is  radically  different  from  the 
present  autocratic  government  of  Germany,  which 
governs  in  accordance  not  with  the  will  of  the  peo- 


114  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

pie  but  with  the  will  of  the  Imperial  Household. 
As  pointed  out  by  Dr.  Prince,  the  prerogatives  of 
the  Kaiser  aim  at  the  protection  of  the  interests 
of  the  Imperial  Household  against  the  aggression 
of  the  people,  but  the  power  of  our  Imperial 
Household  proceeds  from  the  fundamental  idea 
that  the  interests  of  the  sovereign  and  the  subject 
are  inseparably  one.  There  can  be  no  interest  of 
the  Imperial  Household  apart  from  the  interest  of 
the  people.  What  Dr.  Prince  says  in  criticism  of 
the  prerogatives  of  the  Kaiser  is  just  and  adequate 
in  the  case  of  Germany,  but  you  cannot  justly  ap- 
ply his  criticisms  to  the  powers  of  our  Imperial 
Household  because  of  this  basic  difference. 

"Dr.  Prince,  starting  from  his  strong  American 
democratic  standpoint,  and  reviewing  the  selfish 
government  of  Germany,  expresses  deep  sympathy 
with  the  German  social  democrats.  That  is  nat- 
ural enough  for  an  American  gentleman.  But  we 
must  remember  that  each  country  has  its  own  his- 
tory, its  own  manners  and  customs,  and  its  own 
complex  elements  of  national  life.  Just  as  the 
plants  differ  according  to  the  soil  in  which  they  are 
cultivated,  so  the  government  of  each  people  must 
differ  in  its  form  and  its  workings.  What  an 
American  thinks  fit  and  proper  may  not  necessa- 
rily be  so  in  another  country,  any  more  than  what 
the  Germans  think  best  can  be  imposed  upon  other 
nations.  The  statement  of  Dr.  Prince  in  this  re- 
spect must  not  be  applied  without  reservation  to 
our  social  conditions. 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  115 

"If  the  reader  reads  this  work  with  these  points 
in  mind,  he  will  find  it  very  interesting  and  instruc- 
tive. Erudite  scholar  as  Dr.  Prince  is,  he  wields 
his  sharp  dissecting  knife  so  skilfully  that  it  never 
fails  to  touch  the  sore  spot  of  personality.  In  one 
passage  especially  he  delineates  the  process  by 
which  an  ambition  based  on  selfish  pride  finally  re- 
sults in  bringing  a  nation  into  ruin  and  throwing 
the  whole  world  into  trouble.  This  is  a  good  moral 
not  only  to  emperors  and  Kings  but  to  anybody 
who  has  the  welfare  of  a  people  at  heart.  His  quo- 
tation in  one  passage  of  an  arrogant  nobleman 
makes  the  story  highly  dramatic." 

The  above  is  a  mere  outline  of  the  Marquis' 
remarks  on  this  book.  Later  I  personally  visited 
Dr.  Prince  and  explained  the  Marquis'  view  to  him, 
and  especially  the  passage  of  the  Emperor  Meiji 
above  quoted.  The  learned  doctor  nodded  assent 
and  said,  "Since  I  came  to  Japan  I  have  carefully 
studied  the  relation  of  the  Imperial  Household  to 
the  people,  and  have  come  to  share  the  view  of  Mar- 
quis Okuma  that  in  Japan  the  nation  practices  dem- 
ocratic principles  under  the  leadership  of  the  Im- 
perial Household,  and  that  in  that  respect  the  Im- 
perial Household  of  Japan  is  different  from  that 
of  Germany." 

In  short,  this  work  attempts  to  dissect  the  psy- 
chology of  the  Kaiser  with  the  political  conditions 
of  Germany  as  its  background.  The  discussion  is 
always  to  the  point.  It  reveals  the  true  position  of 
the  Kaiser  and  lays  bare  political  conditions  in  Ger- 


116  The  Creed  of  Deutsclitum 

many.  It  shows  clearly  the  antagonism  prevalent 
in  Germany  between  the  autocratic  and  democratic 
ideas,  the  understanding  of  which  is  the  only  key 
to  the  German  political  relations.  As  was  pointed 
out  by  Marquis  Okuma,  the  discussion  is  not  for- 
mally in  accord  with  our  line  of  thought.  Strip  it 
of  its  outer  garments,  however,  and  you  find  that 
the  spirit  in  which  it  was  written  is  in  harmony 
with  ours.  It  will  undoubtedly  serve  as  the  pro- 
verbial stone  of  another  mountain  to  polish  our  own 
gems. 

As  Dr.  Prince  has  consented  to  the  translation 
of  his  book  by  any  competent  translator,  I  asked 
my  friend,  Mr.  Yuya  Goma,  to  do  the  work,  and 
I  have  revised  the  manuscript  with  utmost  care. 
We  hope  that  the  present  translation  is  enough  to 
convey  the  idea  of  the  author  to  our  public. 

Shotei  Shiosawa, 
Hogakuhakushi. 

December,  1916. 


THE  PSYCHOLOGY  OF  THE  KAISER 


THE   KAISER  S   ANTIPATHY 

IN  the  consciousness  of  the  Kaiser  there  is  noth- 
ing that  is  more  dominant  than  his  increasing 
and  virulent  antipathy  to  a  great  body  of  citi- 
zens constituting  no  less  than  one-third  of  his 
empire^ — the  Social  Democrats. 

We  have  all  read  of  the  Kaiser's  hatred  of  the 
party  known  as  the  Social  Democratic  Party.  We 
have  read  the  epithets  which  he  has  constantly 
hurled  at  them,  and  of  his  antipathy  to  their  creeds. 
"Traitors,"  "a  plague  that  must  be  exterminated," 
"a  horde  of  men  unworthy  to  bear  the  name  of  Ger- 
mans," "foes  to  the  country  and  empire,"  "people 
without  a  country  and  enemies  of  religion,"  he  has 
called  them. 

To  a  delegation  of  striking  miners  he  said: 

For  me  every  Social  Democrat  is  synonymous  with  an 
enemy  of  the  empire  and  of  his  country.  If,  therefore,  I 
believe  that  there  are  any  Socialist  tendencies  in  the  move- 
ment [the  strike  of  100,000  men],  stirring  up  to  unlawful 
resistance,  I  shall  act  with  merciless  rigor  and  bring  to 
bear  all  the  power  at  my  disposal — which  is  great. 

Again: 

117 


118  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

The  doctrines  of  the  Social  Democrats  are  not  only 
opposed  to  the  commandments  of  God  and  Christian 
morality  but  are  also  altogether  unpractical,  being  equally 
injurious  to  the  individuals  and  the  whole  community. 

So  violent  is  the  hatred  of  the  Kaiser  toward  this 
party  that  he  even  has  thought  it  might  come  to 
suppressing  it  by  the  army.  He  said  to  the  young 
soldiers  at  Potsdam: 

For  you  there  is  only  one  foe,  and  that  is  my  foe.  In 
view  of  our  present  Socialist  troubles,  it  may  come  to 
this,  that  I  command  you  to  shoot  down  your  own  rela- 
tives, brothers,  and  even  parents,  in  the  streets,  which 
God  forbid;  but  then  you  must  obey  my  orders  without 
a  murmur. 

Why  so  much  feeling?  Why  such  recurrent  out- 
bursts of  anger  and  hatred  against  a  political  party 
which  in  numbers  is  twice  as  large  as  any  other 
single  party  in  the  empire,  a  party  which  in  1912 
cast  4,250,000  votes  *  and  which  was  represented 

*  The  total  vote  cast  was  12,207,000.  The  number  of  Social  Demo- 
crats elected  was  not  fairly  proportionate  to  the  voting  strength  of 
the  party  owing  to  the  inequality  of  representation  of  the  urban  and 
rural  districts.  The  distribution  of  seats  in  the  Reichstag  has  not  been 
changed  since  1871,  more  than  forty  years  ago,  when  the  constitution 
under  Bismarck  was  adopted.  During  this  time  the  population  of 
Germany  has  increased  from  approximately  40,000,000  to  about  68,- 
000,000  and  the  cities  and  industrial  centres  have  gained  enormously 
in  population,  relatively  to  the  rural  districts,  and  what  were  agri- 
cultural towns  have  become  industrial  centres  and  manufacturing  com- 
munities. Consequently,  one  result  of  the  election  laws  is  that  the 
cities  and  industrial  and  manufacturing  centres  where  the  Social 
Democrats  preponderate  have  very  small  representation,  while  the 
rural  districts  where  the  conservatives  (Junkers)  are  a  majority  have 
a  disproportionately  large  representation.  Thus  greater  Berlin  with 
850,000  voters,  where  the  Social  Democrats  are  in  a  vast  majority,  is 
represented  in  the  Reichstag  by  only  eight  members  while  the  same 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  119 

in  the  German  parliament  in  1912  by  110  members, 
the  representatives  of  over  21,000,000  people, 
nearly  one-third  of  the  population  ? 

number  of  voters  in  the  small  rural  districts  are  represented  by  forty- 
eight  members. 

The  inequalities  of  representation  in  the  State  Legislatures  and  city 
governments  are  due  to  the  peculiar  election  laws  existing  in  the 
different  states  of  Germany.  In  Prussia,  for  example,  there  is  what 
is  called  the  "three-class  system."  The  voters  are  divided  into  three 
classes  according  to  the  amount  of  taxes  paid,  the  total  taxes  being 
divided  into  three  equal  parts.  "Then,  starting  with  the  highest  tax- 
payers, those  voters  whose  taxes  total  the  first  third  of  taxes  paid 
constitute  the  first  class  of  electors.  They  are  the  wealthiest  men  and 
naturally  are  smallest  in  numbers. 

"The  second  class  is  made  up  of  those  electors  who  pay  taxes  equal 
to  the  second  division.  Their  number  is  a  little  larger.  The  third 
class  is  made  up  of  all  the  rest  of  the  voters. 

"Each  class  elects  the  same  number  of  deputies  to  the  [Prussian] 
Reichstag  [Diet].  Obviously  the  respectable  middle  class  composed 
of  that  element  in  Continental  politics  known  as  the  bourgeoisie 
throws  its  vote  with  that  of  the  aristocracy  against  the  people  at 
large.  In  one  careful  analysis  of  this  system  the  ratio  in  the  division 
was  roughly  as  follows:  one  voter  in  the  first  class;  thirty-two  voters 
in  the  second  class;  three  hundred  and  fifty  voters  in  the  third 
class. 

"Now  the  exclusive  gentleman  in  the  first  class  elected  just  as  many 
members  of  the  Reichstag  [Diet]  as  did  the  350  workingmen  in  the 
third  class,  or  the  thirtj'-two  well-to-do  business  men  in  the  second 
class."     (The  Kaiser,  edited  by  Asa  Don  Dickenson,  p.  105.) 

Again:  The  city  of  Berlin  in  1910  with  a  population  of  2,000,000 
was  governed  by  33,063  persons,  owing  to  the  three-class  system  of 
voting. 

S.  P.  Orth  (Socialism  and  Democracy  in  Europe)  gives  various 
instances  of  the  inequality  which  appears  in  the  cities.  "In  Berlin 
in  one  precinct  one  man  paid  one-third  of  the  taxes  and  consequently 
possessed  one-third  of  the  legislative  influence  in  that  precinct.  In 
another  precinct  the  president  of  a  large  bank  paid  one-third  of  the 
taxes,  and  two  of  his  associates  paid  another  third.  ITiese  three  men 
named  the  member  of  the  Diet  from  that  precinct." 

In  Saxony  the  electorate  is  divided  into  four  classes  according  to 
their  income.     The  members  of  each  class  have  respectively  1,  2,  3, 


120  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

These  are  strong  words  of  the  Kaiser's  I  have 
quoted.  They  are  not  mere  invectives  uttered  dur- 
ing the  heat  of  a  political  campaign.  They  are  not 
to  be  classed  with  those  emotional  castigations  with 
which  political  stump-speech  orators,  working 
themselves  up  to  a  state  of  passionate  indignation, 
flay  their  adversaries,  and  which  are  promptly  for- 
gotten as  soon  as  the  campaign  is  ended — albeit  the 
Kaiser  is  essentially  a  stump-speech  orator. 

We  have  all  learned  not  to  take  seriously  the 
ephemeral  indignation  of  the  political  orator.  But 
the  Kaiser's  denunciation  of  the  Social  Democrats 
is  the  expression  of  an  antipathy  which  is  fixed, 
deep-rooted,  persistent,  and  is  a  part  of  his  person- 
ality, for  it  has  manifested  itself  in  the  form  of 
recurrent  attacks  of  anger  and  hatred  ever  since 
he  came  to  the  throne,  twenty-seven  years  ago.  It 
is  like  unto  an  obsessing  idea,  common  enough, 
which,  fixed  deep  down  in  the  mind,  rises  in  con- 
sciousness whenever  its  object  presents  itself. 

Fixed  antipathies  are  always,  for  the  psycholo- 
gist, objects  of  interesting  study,  but  for  others, 
even  in  an  Emperor,  they  are  little  more  than  mat- 

and  4  votes.  Consequently,  in  1909,  18,491  voters  of  the  fourth  class, 
having  4  votes  each,  cast  73,964  votes,  while  39,567  voters  of  the 
first  class  cast  only  32,567. 

Corresponding  inequalities  of  representation  necessarily  followed. 
In  consequence  of  all  these  conditions  ballot  reform  was  the  prin- 
cipal immediate  issue  of  the  Social-Democratic  party  before  the  war. 

It  may  also  be  pointed  out  that  the  4,250,000  votes  cast  by  the 
Social  Democrats  in  1912  do  not  represent  the  whole  opposition  to 
the  autocracy,  inasmuch  as  certain  liberal  groups,  the  progressives  and 
the  people's  party  cast  together  1,506,000  votes. 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  121 

ters  of  intellectual  curiosity  unless  the  antipathy 
is  one  of  practical  political  import,  one  that  affects 
the  policies  of  Government  and  the  course  of  his- 
tory. 

If  the  antipathy  of  the  Kaiser  were  only  of  that 
trivial  kind  common  to  many  people,  which  is  mani- 
fested as  a  dread  of  snakes,  or  of  death,  or  other 
banal  object,  its  study  would  be  of  little  practical 
interest  excepting  for  its  victim,  William  II.  him- 
self, although  the  revelation  of  its  origin  and  mean- 
ing would  give  an  insight  into  one  component,  how- 
ever unimportant,  of  an  exalted  personality. 

The  periodical  recurrence  of  the  antipathy  and 
the  psychological  reactions  to  which  it  gave  rise 
would  probably  affect  the  happiness  of  no  one  but 
himself  and  the  unhappy  members  of  his  family 
who  would  have  to  bear  the  brunt  of  it.  No  one  is 
interested  in  other  people's  symptoms. 

But  it  is  different  when  such  a  recurring  antipa- 
thy is  of  a  political  nature.  Then  by  a  study  of 
the  underlying  causes  of  this  obsessing  idea  we  not 
only  can  obtain  an  insight  into  important  compon- 
ents of  the  personality  of  a  great  historical  char- 
acter, but  we  should  expect  to  find  the  true  motives 
which  have  determined  those  policies  of  Govern- 
ment and  the  course  of  history  which  have  been  the 
direct  result  of  the  antipathy. 

The  Kaiser's  hatred  of  the  Social  Democrats  has 
had  momentous  practical  consequences.  It  is  safe 
to  say  that  it  has  been  more  than  any  other  single 
factor  the  motive  which  has  determined  him  to 


122  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

maintain,  against  the  progressive  spirit  of  modern 
civilization,  the  present  autocratic  system  of  gov- 
ernment, to  resist  all  liberal  attempts  to  change  the 
Constitution  so  as  to  give  responsible  representa- 
tive government  to  the  people  and  to  defend  what 
he  claims  as  his  prerogatives.  It  has  determined 
other  tyrannous  measures  which  have  suppressed 
freedom  of  speech  and  the  press  and  banefully  op- 
pressed the  liberty  of  the  German  people.  I  re- 
fer to  the  law  of  lese-majeste. 

This  law,  a  return  to  the  feudalism  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  is  the  means  the  Kaiser  employs  to  punish 
those  who  talk  back.  He  may  insult  his  subjects, 
call  them  all  manner  of  names,  misrepresent  their 
principles,  their  purposes  and  ideals,  excite  animos- 
ity against  them  "as  enemies  to  the  country  and 
religion,"  but  if  they  answer  back  they  are  met  by 
the  law  of  lese-majeste,  and  this  law  is  enforced,  as 
every  one  knows,  with  merciless  severity  to  sup- 
press political  opponents. 

Against  the  Democrats  the  law  has  been  used 
as  a  weapon  of  suppression,  though  without  suc- 
cess. Under  this  law  statistics  showed  that  up  to 
1898,  during  only  the  first  decade  of  William  II. 's 
reign,  more  than  1,000  years  of  imprisonment  had 
been  inflicted  upon  offenders.  A  recent  responsible 
writer  asserts  that  up  to  1914  the  sentences  had 
reached  30,000  years,  but  I  do  not  know  upon  what 
authority  these  figures  are  based. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  editors  of  Social  Demo- 
cratic newspapers,  many  political  leaders  of  the 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  123 

party,  and  writers  for  the  Democratic  press  have 
been  among  those  who  have  served  terms  in  prison 
for  lese-majeste,  or  offense  against  the  press  law. 

There  have  been  times  when  scarcely  a  week 
passed  without  three  or  four  trials.  But  against 
the  Social  Democratic  members  of  the  Reichstag 
when  making  use  of  their  prerogatives  as  elected 
representatives  of  the  people,  this  law  has  not  been 
sufficient  to  satisfy  the  Kaiser's  animosity.  So  on 
one  occasion  when  they  refused  to  rise  and  cheer 
him,  in  response  to  a  demand,  the  Kaiser  had  intro- 
duced, through  his  Chancellor,  a  bill  to  permit  the 
criminal  prosecution  of  these  delegates.  To  its 
credit,  be  it  said,  the  majority  refused  to  permit 
this  encroachment  upon  its  rights. 

It  is  safe  to  say  that  such  a  criminal  law  as  lese- 
majeste  and  its  abuse  for  political  purposes  in  Eng- 
land would  cost  the  King  his  crown. 

To  this  antipathy  of  the  Kaiser  may  also  be 
traced  in  large  part  responsibility  for  the  consoli- 
dation of  the  autocratic  and  military  party  in  Ger- 
many. For,  by  suppressing  the  political  power  of 
the  only  militant  party  that  has  opposed  this  autoc- 
racy, the  Kaiser  has  been  enabled  to  solidify  his 
power  and  intrench  himself  with  his  army  as  the 
dominating  political  force  which  has  determined  the 
foreign  policies  of  the  empire. 

It  is  safe  to  say  that  if  the  democracy  had  been 
in  power,  or  if  the  constitutional  system  of  govern- 
ment had  been  such  that  the  Social  Democratic 
Party,  in  and  out  of  the  Reichstag,  could  have  made 


124  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

its  influence  felt,  the  foreign  and  military  policies 
and  methods  of  the  Government  would  have  been 
far  different  and  there  would  have  been  no  war. 
GeiTXianism  and  Pan-Geimanism  would  not  have 
threatened  the  world,  t 

t  Surprise  has  been  expressed  that  the  Social  Democrats,  in  view 
of  their  avowed  principles  and  tlieir  platform,  did  not  in  the  begin- 
ning throw  their  influence  against  the  war,  but  are  patriotically  sup- 
porting the  government.  In  other  words,  that  there  is  a  United 
Fatherland.  There  is  no  question  that  the  Social  Democrats  were 
bitterly  opposed  to  this  war  and  yet  they  cast  their  111  votes  in  the 
Reichstag  unanimously  in  favor  of  the  war  budget,  but  it  was  after 
war  had  been  declared  by  the  Upper  House  and  the  Emperor. 

This  seems  on  the  face  of  the  facts  a  complete  reversal  of  the 
Party  policy  and  yet  it  is  easily  understood. 

The  Social  Democrats,  though  opposed  to  militarism  and  war,  are 
first  and  all  the  time  patriots.  They  have  always  declared  that  if 
the  Fatherland  were  attacked  they  would  rally  to  its  defense,  and 
all  the  world  knows  that  the  German  people  as  a  whole  have  been 
made  to  believe  that  the  Fatherland  was  attacked. 

In  1907  Bebel,  then  leader  of  the  Party,  declared  in  a  debate  in 
the  Reichstag  that  if  the  Fatherland  were  attacked  even  he,  in  his 
old  age,  would  "shoulder  a  musket"  in  its  defense.  And  in  the  next 
Party  Convention  he  declared: 

"I  said,  if  the  Fatherland  really  must  be  defended,  then  we  will 
defend  it.  Because  it  is  our  Fatherland.  It  is  the  land  in  which 
we  live,  whose  language  we  speak,  whose  culture  we  possess.  Be- 
cause we  wish  to  make  this,  our  Fatherland,  more  beautiful  and 
more  complete  than  any  other  land  on  earth.  We  defend  it,  thei'e- 
fore,  not  for  you  but  against  you." 

Likewise  Von  VoUmar  later  said  in  the  Bavarian  Diet: 
"If  the  necessity  should  arise  for  the  protection  of  the  realm 
against  foreign  invasion,  then  it  will  become  evident  that  the  Social 
Democrats  love  their  Fatherland  no  less  than  do  their  neighbors; 
that  they  will  as  gladly  and  heroically  offer  themselves  to  its  de- 
fense. On  the  other  hand,  if  the  foolish  notion  should  ever  arise  to 
use  the  army  for  the  support  of  a  warring  class  prerogative,  for  the 
defense  of  indefeasible  demands,  and  for  the  crushing  of  those 
just  ambitions  which  are  the  product  of  our  times,  and  a  necessary 
concomitant  of  our  economic  and  political  development, — then  we 
are  of  the  firm  conviction  that  the  day  will  come  when  the  army  will 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  125 

More  than  this,  it  is  impossible,  I  believe,  for 
any  one  to  study  the  internal  politics  of  Germany 
without  arriving  at  tlie  firm   conviction  that  the 

remember   that   it    sprcing'    from   the   people,    and   that   its   own    in- 
terests are  those  of  tlie  masses." 

As  S.  P.  Orth,  from  whose  work  I  take  these  quotations,  says, 
"This  makes  their  position  very  clear." 

When  war  was  declared  tlie  position  which  the  Social  Democrats 
were  obliged  to  take  was  also  clear.  It  was  not  a  question  of  oppos- 
ing the  war.  As  Patrick  Henry  declared,  in  his  famous  speech  at 
the  beginning  of  our  own  Revolution,  "Gentlemen  may  cry  'Peace ! 
Peace !'  But  there  is  no  Peace.  The  war  has  actually  begun."  And 
so  with  the  Social  Democrats,  it  was  only  a  question  of  voting  sup- 
plies. The  Social  Democrats  disclaimed  all  responsibility  for  the 
war.  As  Deputy  Haase  said  in  the  Reichstag  in  explanation  of  the 
vote  of  his  colleagues: 

"The  responsibility  for  this  calamity  falls  upon  those  who  are 
responsible  for  the  imjierial  policies  that  led  to  it.  We  absolutely 
decline  all  responsibility.  The  Social  Democrats  fought  this  policy 
with  all  their  might.  At  this  moment,  however,  the  question  before 
us  is  not  war,  or  no  war.  The  war  is  here.  The  question  now  is  one 
of  defence  of  the  country.  Our  nation  and  the  future  of  its  liberty 
are  jeopardized  by  a  possible  victory  of  Russian  despotism,  the 
hands  of  which  are  stained  with  blood  of  the  best  of  its  own  nation. 
Against  this  danger  it  is  our  duty  to  secure  the  culture  and  in- 
dependence of  our  land." 

And  the  Vonixierln,  the  official  organ  of  the  Social  Democrats,  on 
July  30th,  just  before  the  declaration  of  war,  announced: 

"We  are  opposed  to  militarism,  and  we  reaffirm  our  opposition 
to  monarchism,  to  which  we  have  always  been  opposed,  and  always 
will  be.  We  have  been  compelled  from  the  first  to  lead  a  bitter 
.struggle  against  the  temperamental  wearer  of  the  crown.  We 
recognize,  however,  and  we  have  stated  it  repeatedly,  that  William 
II.  has  proved  himself  to  be  a  sincere  friend  of  peace  among  the 
nations,  particularly  in  later  years.  .  .  .  But  even  the  strongest 
character  is  not  entirely  free  from  influence,  and  we  regret  to  say 
that  proofs  are  accumulating  in  abundance  that  the  clique  of  war 
shouters  have  been  at  work  again  to  influence  the  government  in 
favor  of  the  devastation  of  the  whole  of  Europe.  .  .  . 

"In  England  it  is  the  general  opinion  that  the  German  Kaiser  in 
his  capacity  as  the  ally  and  adviser  of  Austria  was  the  arbiter  in 


126  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

elimination  of  German  militarism,  for  which  the 
war  is  being  waged,  and  therefore  the  hope  of  per- 
manent world's  peace,  must  rest  upon  the  German 
Democratic  Party.  From  this  viewpoint,  the  study 
of  the  Kaiser's  antipathy  for  the  Social  Demo- 
crats offers  a  most  fruitful  psychological  study. 

Why,  then,  I  repeat,  so  much  feeling  when  the 
Kaiser  thinks  of  the  Social  Democratic  Party? 
Why  such  hatred  of  it?  Why  such  anger?  Why 
such  a  personal  attitude? 

To  explain  it  on  the  ground  of  differences  in 
political  principles,  as  a  political  antipathy  intensely 
expressed  in  terms  of  an  intense  emotional  per- 
sonality, is  a  superficial  and  inadequate  psycholog- 
ical explanation,  although  it  is  commonly  satisfying 
as  a  political  explanation.  The  two  are  not  synony- 
mous. The  reasons  for  this  distinction  will  appear 
as  we  proceed. 

If  the  party  represented  only  a  small  band  of 
criminal  agitators,  of  militant  anarchists,  let  us 
say,  who  sought  by  assassination  and  terrorism  to 
destroy  the  existing  Government,  such  an  attitude 
of  mind  would  be  easily  comprehensible  and  would 
need  no  analysis.  But  the  Social  Democratic  Party 

this  trouble  and  had  it  in  his  power  to  let  peace  or  war  fall  from 

the  folds  of  his  royal  robes.    And  England  is  right.     As  conditions 

are,  William  II.  has  the  decision  in  his  hands." 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  although  the  Social  Democrats  feel  that 
the  Kaiser  and  the  military  party  are  to  blame  for  the  war,  they 
also  necessarily  feel  that  as  patriots  they  must  support  the  Fatherland 
as  would  be  the  case  with  any  party  in  any  country.  But  it  also 
follows  that  if  the  Democracy  had  been  in  control  of  the  govern- 
ment of  Germany  there  would  have  been  no  war. 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  127 

in  1888,  on  the  accession  of  William  II,  on  the 
basis  of  one  voter  in  every  five  of  the  population, 
represented  less  than  4,000,000  subjects,  and  in 
1912  over  21,000,000,  a  third  of  the  total  popula- 
tion.J  It  is,  therefore,  representative  of  a  large 
part  of  the  public  opinion  of  the  empire,  and,  above 
all,  of  the  working  classes.  Indeed,  it  is  the  largest 
political  party  in  the  empire.  Criminal  agitation 
is,  therefore,  out  of  the  question. 

In  other  countries  political  feeling  in  times  of 
crises  often  runs  high,  and  at  times  statesmen, 
rulers,  leaders  of  political  parties  generally,  have 
strong  political  bias  and  feel  intensely  hostile  to 
their  political  opponents;  but  they  do  not  regard 
them  as  foes  of  their  country,  and  God,  and  religion, 
to  be  crsuhed  by  every  force  in  the  power  of  the 
Government;  and  they  rarely  carry  their  hostility, 
and  anger,  and  hatred  into  social  and  industrial  life, 

:{:  The  steady  growth  of  the  Social  Democratic  Party  has  been 
phenomenal  and  is  of  importance  in  the  bearing  it  has  upon  the 
future.  In  1871  the  party  cast  only  134,000  votes  and  from  that  time 
to  1912  there  has  been  an  almost  continuous  increase,  as  may  be 
seen   from   tlie   following  table: 

1871    124,000 

1874    • 352,000 

1877    493,009 

1878 437,000 

1881    312,000 

1884    550,000 

1887     763,000 

1890     1,427,000 

1893     1,787,000 

1898     2,107,000 

1903 3,011,000 

1907     3,259,000 

1912     4,250,000 


128  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

as  has  been  the  case  with  the  German  Emperor. 

Furthermore,  the  persistency  of  the  Emperor's 
antipathy  is  remarkable.  It  is  hke  an  obsession.  He 
has  retained,  undiminished,  his  hatred  of  the  Social 
Democrats  from  his  accession  to  the  outbreak  of  the 
war,  and  has  never  ceased  to  angrily  stigmatize 
them  with  such  emotional  epithets  as  I  have  cited. 

Now  it  is  probable,  owing  to  a  psj'-chological  law, 
that  when  strong  emotion,  out  of  all  apparent  pro- 
portion to  the  cause,  is  excited  by  some  object,  that 
object  has  struck  some  sentiment,  a  "complex"  of 
ideas  and  emotions  deeply  rooted  in  the  personal- 
ity, but  not  squarely  admitted  and  faced  by  con- 
sciousness.   Examples  of  this  we  see  every  day. 

A  strong  protectionist  inveighs  with  intense  anger 
against  the  principle  of  free  trade  and  the  political 
party  that  advocates  this  principle  in  its  platform. 
The  reason  he  consciously  gives  is  the  economic  dis- 
advantage which,  he  apprehends,  will  result  to  the 
country  at  large.  But  though  this  may  be  the  rea- 
son, or  rather  one  reason  for  his  political  opinion, 
it  is  not  the  real  reason  for  his  emotion — his  anger 
and  his  invectives. 

These  are  due  to  the  fact  that  the  free-trade  doc- 
trine strikes  a  chord  within  him  which  resonates  with 
selfish  fear  for  his  own  business  interests,  and  the 
reaction  of  this  chord  is  anger.  In  other  words, 
to  use  a  homely  phrase,  while  apparently  speaking 
from  the  viewpoint  of  political  principles,  he  is  real- 
ly "talking  out  of  his  pocket."  But  he  does  not 
squarely  face  and  perhaps  is  only  half  conscious 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  129 

or  entirely  unconscious  of  this  fact.  This  selfish 
viewpoint  is  his  "unconscious  attitude  of  mind." 

Now,  is  the  Kaiser's  antipathy  to  the  Social  Dem- 
ocrats merely  the  expression  of  an  academic  dis- 
belief in  the  INIarxian  principles  of  Socialism  and  a 
disbelief  in  the  practicability  of  such  principles  if 
applied  by  the  State  to  political  government?  Or 
are  these  only  ostensible  reasons  for  his  antipathy? 
If  the  latter,  a  study  of  the  Kaiser's  mind  ought  to 
reveal  deep-rooted  sentiments  of  another  kind  which 
will  explain  his  emotional  reaction.  But  in  that  case, 
for  a  complete  explanation,  we  must  inquire  what 
there  is  that  is  peculiar  in  the  political  tenets  of 
the  Social  Democracy  that  touches  these  sentiments 
and  excites  the  reaction.  In  other  words,  it  is  a 
question  of  the  Why. 

These  questions  rise  above  a  banal  curiosity  to 
inquire  into  a  peculiar  personal  dislike  of  an  Em- 
peror, however  that  might  be  justified  by  the  exalted 
world-position  which  he  occupies.  They  are  im- 
portant in  that,  if  pursued,  they  may  lead  to  a 
deeper  understanding  of  his  personality,  and  they 
may  unfold  both  his  viewpoint  of  government  as 
exemplified  by  the  German  system  and  the  antag- 
onistic viewpoint  of  the  German  Democracy,  which 
for  many  years  has  been  striving  against  the  power 
of  the  Emperor  to  force  its  ideals  and  aspirations 
upon  the  autocracy  that  rules  Germany. 

All  these  questions  are  involved  in  the  psychology 
of  the  personality  of  the  Kaiser.  The  political 
questions  are  involved,  for  no  personality  can  be 


130  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

understood  apart  from  its  environment  to  which  it 
reacts,  and  which  is  largelj^  responsible  for  the  for- 
mation of  "sentiments." 

The  sentiments  are  of  prime  and  fundamental 
importance  in  the  formation  of  a  personality.  I  use 
the  term  "sentiments"  in  a  restricted  psychological 
sense  and  not  in  accordance  with  popular  usage.  I 
shall  have  occasion  later  to  explain  how  sentiments 
are  formed  after  we  have  become  acquainted  with 
some  of  the  Kaiser's  mental  attitudes. 

Meanwhile  I  would  simply  explain  in  justifica- 
tion of  this  inquiry,  that  character  depends  upon 
the  psycho-physiological  organization  of  ideas,  de- 
rived in  the  broadest  sense  from  life's  experiences, 
with  the  innate  primitive  instinctive  dispositions  to 
behave  or  react  to  given  situations  (i.  e.,  to  react 
to  the  environment). 

Thus,  on  the  one  hand,  sentiments  are  formed 
which  characterize  our  attitude  toward  life,  includ- 
ing therein  our  personal,  social,  political,  and  indus- 
trial relations  to  the  world  about  us;  and,  on  the 
other,  the  inborn  natural  instincts  of  man  are  har- 
nessed, controlled,  and  repressed,  or  cultivated  and 
given  free  rein.  Upon  the  development  of  senti- 
ments, therefore,  not  only  the  behavior  of  the  in- 
dividual depends,  but  the  whole  social  organization. 
Of  course,  in  a  brief  article  of  this  kind  we  shall  be 
obliged  to  limit  ourselves  to  a  few  of  the  sentiments 
involved  in  the  questions  placed  before  us  and  there- 
fore to  a  very  limited  study  of  the  Kaiser's  per- 
sonality. 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  131 


II 


THE  KAISER  S  PREROGATIVES 

Let  US  go  back  to  the  year  1888,  when  the  Kaiser 
came  to  the  throne.  In  his  very  first  speech  to  the 
Prussian  Diet  he  proclaimed  with  noticeable  em- 
phasis that  he  was  "firmly  resolved  to  maintain  in- 
tact and  guard  from  all  encroachment  the  char- 
tered prerogatives  of  the  Crown."  (The  Kaiser, 
edited  by  Asa  Don  Dickenson,  page  113.)  It  was 
noticed  that  he  laid  marked  stress  on  these  words, 
so  that  it  was  publicly  commented  upon  by  those 
who  heard  him.  This  intention  to  defend  his  pre- 
rogatives the  Kaiser  has  consistently  maintained 
ever  since,  and  more  than  once  has  proclaimed. 
What  are  the  "prerogatives"  about  which  the  Kaiser 
took  the  very  first  opportunity  to  warn  Germany 
and  about  which  he  has  been  so  tenacious?  They 
can  be  briefly  stated. 

In  the  first  place,  we  must  know  it  is  the  Kaiser's 
prerogative  not  to  be  responsible  to  the  people  or 
to  Parliament,  but  only  to  himself.  He  does  not 
derive  his  power  from  either,  but  he  reigns  by  his 
own  right.  This  is  his  prerogative.  Furthermore, 
he  not  only  reigns,  but  it  is  his  prerogative  to  gov- 
ern. The  King  of  England  reigns,  but,  as  has  so 
often  been  said,  he  does  not  govern.  In  England 
the  responsibility  for  governing  rests  entirely  with 
the  Ministry,  which  in  principle  is  only  a  select  com- 


132  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

mittee  of  Parliament.  It  is  the  English  Parlia- 
ment, therefore,  and  practically  the  elected  House 
of  Commons  that  governs. 

In  the  second  place  it  is  the  Kaiser's  prerogative 
to  appoint  a  Chancellor  to  help  him  govern.  He 
has  no  Cabinet,  nor  Board  of  Advisors.  The  Chan- 
cellor is  responsible  only  to  the  Emperor.  Par- 
liament may  be  entirely  opposed  to  him,  but  in  such 
case  he  does  not  necessarily  resign,  as  would  the 
British  Prime  Minister,  nor  is  it  the  customary 
usage.  He  may  not  have  been  a  member  of  Par- 
liament when  appointed.  The  Kaiser  alone  may 
dismiss  him,  as  he  dismissed  Bismarck.  The  Em- 
peror may  disregard  him  and  his  advice,  if  he  likes ; 
so  that  in  practice  he  may  be  his  own  Chancellor, 
as  it  is  commonly  said  in  Germany  he  has  been  ever 
since  Bismarck's  dismissal  and  as  Bismarck  fore- 
told would  be  the  case. 

A  third  prerogative  is  to  appoint  the  Ministers, 
the  heads  of  the  great  departments — Navy,  Foreign 
Affairs,  Colonies,  etc.,  who  are  under  the  Chancel- 
lor. Thus  all  executive  power  resides  in  the  Kaiser. 
Parliament  has  none.  We  may  say  it  is  the  Kaiser's 
prerogative  to  be  the  administration. 

A  fourth  prerogative  is  to  be  Commander  in 
Chief  of  the  Army  and  to  have  absolute  authority 
over  the  forces  of  the  army  both  in  peace  and  in 
war.  (Art.  63  of  the  Constitution.)  It  is  his  pre- 
rogative to  "determine  the  numerical  strength,  the 
organization,  and  the  divisional  contingents  of  the 
imperial  army";  also  to  appoint  all  superior  offi- 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  133 

cers.  (Art.  64*. )  That  the  Kaiser  regards  this  as 
one  of  his  most  cherished  prerogatives  the  world  well 
knows. 

A  fifth  and  exceedingly  powerful  prerogative  is 
to  appoint  and  control  the  seventeen  members  of 
the  upper  house — the  Bundesrath,  or  Federal  Coun- 
cil:— the  most  powerful  upper  house  in  the  world. 
The  Kaiser  thus  has  the  votes— only  fourteen  being 
required — to  defeat  any  amendment  to  the  Consti- 
tution, and  in  practice  he  has  always  controlled  a 
majority  of  the  Council,  which  has  been  the  creature 
of  the  Kaiser  throughout  its  history.  With  the  con- 
sent of  the  Council  he  can  declare  war,  but,  as  the 
Council  is  a  lady  of  easy  consent,  this  limitation 
need  not  bear  hardly  and  the  wooing  need  be  but 
short  and  light. 

A  sixth  prerogative  is  to  initiate  all  legislation, 
although  indirectly,  through  his  controlled  Federal 
Council,  of  which  the  Chancellor  is  President.  The 
lower  house,  the  Reichstag,  elected  by  the  people, 
cannot  initiate  legislation,  so  well  did  Bismarck  fix 
the  Constitution  for  the  benefit  of  Prussia  and  the 
Kaiser. 

All  measures  must  originate  in  the  upper  house, 
which  can  also  veto  them  when  amended  in  the 
Reichstag,  and  can  dissolve  the  latter  (with  the 
Kaiser's  consent)  if  it  doesn't  like  its  ways.  (Think 
of  the  House  of  Lords  dissolving  the  Commons!) 
The  Kaiser  has  thus  very  great  power  in  controlling 
legislation.  (With  almost  innumerable  parties, 
none  of  which  has  a  majority,  in  the  House,  log- 


134  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

rolling  under  an  astute  Chancellor  has  been  raised 
to  a  fine  art  that  would  make  an  American  State 
Legislature  blush  like  a  neophyte. ) 

The  Reichstag,  however,  can  refuse  to  vote  sup- 
plies and  to  pass  measures  favored  by  the  Kaiser. 
The  elected  representatives  of  the  people  can  thus 
talk,  resolve  and  criticise,  and  refuse  to  follow  the 
Kaiser  and  thus  create  a  public  opinion  which  he 
may  or  may  not  dare  to  oppose,  but  they  can  do 
little  more. 


Ill 


THE  KAISER  S  DIVINE  RIGHT  DELUSION 

Finally,  the  Kaiser  claims  that  his  prerogative  to 
govern  is  derived  from  God,  granted  by  the  Al- 
mighty to  his  House,  the  House  of  Hohenzollern. 
This  is  far  from  being  meant  as  a  figure  of  speech 
or  mere  rhetoric,  or  an  allegorical  expression  of  re- 
ligious responsibility  for  duties  to  be  performed. 
It  is  a  deep,  all-abiding  belief  and  principle  of  ac- 
tion. 

It  is  difficult  for  us  Americans  of  the  twentieth 
century  fully  to  grasp  this  belief  in  a  present-day 
man  of  boasted  culture,  from  whom  we  expect  com- 
mon sense.  We  may  laugh  at  it,  but  in  its  prac- 
tical consequences  it  is  no  laughing  matter.  It  is 
fundamental  to  the  Kaiser's  viewpoint  and  to  an 
understanding  of  his  attitude  toward  his  subjects 


The  Psycliology  of  the  Kaiser  135 

and  the  world.  Another  sovereign  derives  his  right 
to  reign,  if  not  to  govern,  from  the  Constitution  of 
his  country,  which  means  in  the  last  analysis  by 
contract  with  his  people. 

But  the  German  Emperor  refuses  to  acknowledge 
any  responsibility  to  the  people,  or  any  dependence 
upon  the  people,  or  the  Constitution,  or  contract, 
for  his  right  to  govern.  He  derives  this  right  di- 
rectly from  God.  Whatever  rights  and  powers  the 
people  possess  descend  from  the  Kaiser,  who  grants 
them  through  the  Constitution ;  the  rights  and  pow- 
ers of  the  Kaiser  do  not  ascend  from  the  people, 
as  in  a  democracy. 

The  concentration  of  irresponsible  hereditary 
power  in  one  man  and  those  appointed  by  him  is 
plainly  an  autocracy.  "The  Divine  right  of  Kings 
to  rule"  is  a  doctrine  dating  back  to  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  is  by  Americans  naively  supposed  to 
have  ended  nearly  a  century  ago  with  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  "Holy  Alliance,"  whose  designs  upon 
South  America  gave  rise  to  our  Monroe  Doctrine 
in  1823. 

This  doctrine  of  Divine  right,  then,  is  one  of  the 
prerogatives,  if  not  in  his  mind  the  great  preroga- 
tive, which  the  Kaiser  announced  he  was  resolved 
to  defend.  And  it  does  not  belong  to  the  present 
Kaiser  alone,  but  was  possessed,  as  he  claims,  by 
his  long  line  of  ancestors  of  the  House  of  Hohen- 
zollern,  and  will  descend  to  his  successors  of  this 
house.  It  is  the  prerogative  of  his  house.  Thus  he 
announced : 


136  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

It  is  the  tradition  of  our  house  that  we,  the  Hohenzol- 
lerns,  regard  ourselves  as  appointed  by  God  to  govern 
and  to  lead  the  people  whom  it  is  given  us  to  rule,  for 
their  well-beina;  and  the  advancement  of  their  material 
and  intellectual  interests. 

And  again: 

I  look  upon  the  people  and  nation  handed  on  to  me  as  a 
responsiblity,  conferred  upon  me  by  God:  and  that  it  is, 
as  is  written  in  the  Bible,  my  duty  to  increase  this  heri- 
tage, for  which  one  day  I  shall  be  called  upon  to  give  an 
account ;  those  who  try  to  interfere  with  my  task  I  shall 
crush. 

And  again: 

I  regard  my  whole  position  as  given  to  me  direct  from 
heaven,  and  that  I  have  been  called  by  the  Highest  to 
do  His  work,  by  One  to  Whom  I  must  one  day  render  an 
account. 

This  claim  as  German  Emperor,  or  as  King  of 
Prussia,  has  been  announced  again  and  again  by  the 
Kaiser,  and  his  words  have  been  quoted  by  the 
press,  by  magazine  writers  and  pamphleteers  and 
bookmakers  unto  weariness  of  the  reader. 

The  prerogatives  we  have  briefly  simimarized  are 
imperial,  but  be  it  noted  they  are  double-headed  in 
that — mutatis  mutandis — they  also  belong  to  Wil- 
liam II  as  King  of  Prussia  so  far  as  the  constitu- 
tional relations  of  the  kingdom  to  the  empire  make 
them  applicable. 

The  odd  notion  of  Divine  right  the  Kaiser  picked 
up  from  his  grandfather,  William  I,  who,  when  he 
was  crowned  King  of  Prussia  at  Konigsberg,  to 
show  he  was  above  the  Constitution  which  his  pred- 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  137 

ecessor  had  granted  the  people,  raised  with  his  own 
hands  the  crown  from  the  altar,  "set  it  on  his  own 
head,  and  announced  in  a  loud  voice,  'I  receive  this 
crown  from  God's  liand  and  from  none  other.'  " 

And,  referring  to  this  historical  incident,  the  pres- 
ent Kaiser,  William  II.,  in  a  speech,  now  historic, 
at  the  same  place,  said: 

And  here  my  grandfather,  again,  by  his  own  right,  set 
the  Prussian  crown  upon  his  head,  once  more  distinctly 
empliixsizing  the  fact  that  it  was  accorded  him  by  the  will 
of  God  alone,  and  not  by  Parliament  or  by  any  assem- 
blage of  the  people  or  by  popular  vote,  and  that  he  thus 
looked  upon  himself  as  the  chosen  instrument  of  Heaven, 
and  as  such  performed  his  duties  as  regent  and  sovereign. 

From  a  psychological  point  of  view,  it  does  not 
matter — any  more  than  it  signified  anything  to  the 
Kaiser  and  his  grandfather — that,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  first  ruling  Hohenzollern  of  Branden- 
burg, Elector  Frederick  I.,  acquired  his  title  to  the 
Electorate  by  taking  from  King  Sigismund  of 
Hungary,  in  1411,  a  mortgage  on  the  province  (the 
nucleus  of  modern  Prussia)  as  security  for  a  loan 
to  that  hard-up  potentate  of  about  one  hundred 
thousand  gulden.  A  little  later  he  foreclosed  the 
mortgage  and  took  title — a  rather  poor  title  at  that, 
as  there  was  already  a  mortgage  on  the  property 
which  it  was  convenient  for  Sigismund  to  repudiate. 
Perhaps  royal  second  mortgages — like  marriages — 
are  made  in  Heaven,  and  thus  they  become  "Divine 
Rights."* 

*  In  1701   Elector  Frederick  III.  took  the  title  of  (first)   King  of 
Prussia  as  Frederick  I. 


138  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

What  does  psychologically  matter  is  that  the  pres- 
ent Kaiser  has  persuaded  himself,  forgetting  all 
about  this  business  transaction,  that  his  early 
Hohenzollern  Shylock  (in  foreclosing  the  mort- 
gage) "felt  within  himself  the  call  to  journey  to 
this  land"  of  Brandenburg — plainly  a  Divine  call 
— and  "was  convinced  that  the  task  [of  governing] 
was  given  him  from  above."  (Kaiser's  speech,  Feb. 
3,  1899.) 

What  counts  psychologically  is  that  the  Kaiser 
believes  that  a  Divine  right  to  rule  is  his  preroga- 
tive. How,  in  this  age,  a  man  who  has  shown  such 
marked  ability  in  certain  directions  can  be  such  a 
fool — I  mean  psychologically,  of  course — as  to  per- 
suade himself  to  believe  such  stuff,  is  another  story 
that  would  make  an  interesting  psychological  study 
in  itself,  and  in  the  last  analysis  could  probably  be 
traced  to  subconscious  wishes  which  have  produced 
this  conscious  delusion,  just  as  such  subconscious 
processes  determine  the  delusions  of  insane  peo- 
ple. 

Our  conscious  thoughts  are  much  more  deter- 
mined by  subconscious  processes,  of  which  we  are 
unaware,  than  we  realize. 

One  great  popular  delusion  is  that  our  minds  are 
more  exact  logical  instruments  than  they  really  are, 
and  we  stand  in  awe  of  the  minds  of  great  men, 
thinking  that  because  they  are  superior  in  certain 
directions,  therefore  they  are  superior  in  all  other 
directions  of  their  activities  where  they  claim  su- 
periority; whereas,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  a  man  may 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  139 

be  eminently  superior  in  certain  fields  of  mental 
activity  and  psychologically  a  perfect  fool-thinker 
and  fool-performer  in  other  fields. 

Helmholtz  said  of  the  eye  that  it  was  such  an 
imperfect  optical  instrument  that  if  an  instrument 
maker  should  send  him  an  optical  instrument  so 
badly  made  he  would  refuse  to  accept  it  and  return 
it  forthwith.  He  might  have  said  the  same  thing  of 
the  human  mind.  It  is  a  very  imperfect  instrument 
of  thought.  All  we  can  say  of  it  is  that  though  a 
poor  thing  it  is  the  best  we  can  get.  The  deeper 
insight  we  get  into  the  mechanism  of  the  human 
mind,  the  poorer  thing  it  appears  as  an  instrument 
of  precision. 

This  Divine  Right  delusion  is  psychologically  in- 
teresting in  that  it  very  closely  resembles  and  be- 
haves like  the  delusions  characteristic  of  the  mental 
disease  paranoia.  This  is  not  to  say — indeed  it 
would  be  absurd  to  say  as  some  have  said — that  the 
Kaiser  is  afflicted  with  paranoia.  But  it  is  true 
that  in  normal  people  we  find  the  prototypes  of 
mental  processes  observed  in  abnormal  mental  con- 
ditions. The  essential  characteristic  of  paranoia  is 
a  systematized  delusion:  that  is,  some  belief  into 
which  all  sorts  of  facts  of  the  environment  are  in- 
terwoven and  through  which  such  events,  casual  ac- 
tions of  other  people  and  their  motives  are  inter- 
preted. Thus,  an  insane  person  may  imagine  he  is 
the  object  of  persecution  and  then  proceed  to  in- 
terpret any  kind  of  act  of  others,  really  unrelated 
to  himself,  through  this  belief,  imagining  that  it  is 


140  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

directed  towards  the  end  of  persecuting  him.  Or  a 
paranoiac  may  imagine  that  he  is  the  divine  emissary 
of  God  and  then  interpret  one  hundred  and  one 
everyday  events  of  Ufe  as  divine  messages  to  him- 
self. 

In  normal  people  we  see  the  prototype  of  such 
a  delusion  in  the  form  of  a  mildly  fixed  idea  which 
leads  a  person  to  wrongly  interpret  other  people's 
motives  and  acts.  You  may  say,  if  you  like,  that 
he  believes  such  and  such  a  thing  because  he  wishes 
to,  or  because  of  some  firmly  fixed  belief  through 
which  he  interprets  it.  The  difference  between  the 
normal  and  abnormal  person  is  that  the  former  can, 
if  he  desires  and  the  truth  is  properly  presented, 
change  his  belief ;  the  abnormal  person  cannot. 

It  would  be  an  extravagance  to  say  that  the  Kai- 
ser's delusion  is  anything  more  than  a  normal  fixed 
idea  which  he  could  change  if  he  wished  to.  But 
this  fixed  idea  is  so  strong,  so  deeply  rooted  in  his 
personality,  and  so  directly  the  expression  of  a 
cherished  and  cultivated  wish,  conscious  or  subcon- 
scious, that  it  dominates  his  interpretation  of  facts 
which  to  an  ordinary  person  flatly  contradict  it.  It 
leads  him  to  entirely  ignore  both  palpable  facts, 
such  as  the  purchase  with  cold  cash,  by  his  ancestor, 
of  the  throne,  or  more  exactly,  electorate  of  Bran- 
denburg, and  universally  accepted  understandings 
of  the  relation  of  God  to  the  worldly  affairs  of  men 
— so  universally  accepted  that  they  have  passed  into 
the  common-sense  of  mankind.  We  may  say,  para- 
phrasing the  words  of  a  subconscious  personality 


Tlie  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  141 

known  as  "Sally"  in  a  case  of  multiple  personality 
describing  the  attitude  of  mind  of  one  of  her  other 
selves:  "There  are  so  many  things  he  cannot  or 
will  not  see.  He  holds  to  certain  beliefs  and  ideas 
with  unwearying  patience.  It  makes  no  difference 
that  the  facts  are  all  against  him.  He  still  ignores 
the  facts,  still  idealizes  himself  and  his  preroga- 
tives." 

The  Kaiser's  fixed  idea  is,  according  to  psycho- 
logical laws,  determined  by  wishes — his  wish  to  be 
sole  and  autocratic  ruler  of  Prussia  and  the 
Empire,  his  wish  to  be  the  sole  arbiter  and  di- 
rector of  the  imperial  destinies,  his  wish,  "con- 
sidering himself  the  instrument  of  the  Lord, 
without  heeding  the  views  and  opinions"  and 
will  of  his  subjects  to  "go  his  way";  his  wish  to 
decide  everything,  like  a  patriarch  for  the  people, 
and  to  treat  them  like  children ;  his  wish  to  be  looked 
up  to  as  the  supreme  power — all  these  desires  de- 
termine in  him  the  belief  that  he  is  the  "anointed  of 
the  Lord,"  a  ruler  by  Divine  authority.  For  only 
by  such  authority  could  he  logically  find  justifica- 
tion for  the  assimiption  of  such  powers  and  the  ful- 
fillment of  his  desires.  In  other  words,  through  the 
acceptance  of  the  Divine  Right  Delusion  he  finds 
a  means  for  the  fulfillment  of  his  wishes.  And  cu- 
riously enough,  but  still  according  to  psychological 
laws,  this  fixed  idea  with  its  powerful  instinct  of 
self-assertion  has  awakened  in  his  Junker  and  mil- 
itaristic supporters  sentiments  of  self-abasement 
through  which  they  yield  submissively  to  this  as- 


142  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

sumed  prerogative  of  the  Kaiser  and  adopt  an  atti- 
tude of  Divinity  Worship.  Thus  we  have  a  politico- 
religious  cult  in  which  the  Kaiser  is  the  Godhead. 
And  thus  we  have  wishes  conscious  and  subcon- 
scious, but  working  subconsciously,  making  a  fool — 
psychologically  speaking — of  the  Kaiser. 

The  most  curious  part  of  this  whole  Divine  Right 
business  is  that  in  Germany,  with  all  its  "Kultur," 
there  has  been  scarcely  one  single  voice  among  all 
the  people  of  Germany  publicly  to  deny  this  claim, 
excepting  the  voice  of  the  Social  Democracy;  or, 
if  there  has,  it  has  been  like  a  voice  crying  in  the 
wilderness — or  perhaps  from  behind  prison  bars, 
where  such  rashness  brought  the  prisoner,  con- 
demned under  the  feudal  law  of  lese-majeste.  We 
shall  presently  see  what  the  German  democracy 
thinks  about  it. 


IV 


^THE  GERMAN   AUTOCRACY  AND   THE  ARMY 

The  practical  upshot  of  this  whole  German  sys- 
tem of  government,  in  which  imperial  prerogatives 
and  an  impotent  opera  bouffe  Reichstag  are  essen- 
tial ingredients,  is  that  the  Kaiser  with  his  Chan- 
cellor and  the  Ministers  of  the  several  departments 
(Foreign  Affairs,  Navy,  Post  Office,  etc.),  a  bu- 
reaucracy responsible  only  to  the  Kaiser,  constitute 
an  autocracy  independent  of  Parliament  and  the 
voters.    Consequently  the  Government  is  intended 


i 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  143 

to  be  and  is  for  the  State,  by  the  State,  not  of  the 
people,  by  the  people. 

The  Kaiser's  point  of  view  as  to  his  own  place 
in  the  State  is  shown  by  some  of  his  sayings:  "There 
is  only  one  master  in  this  country — I  am  he  and 
I  will  not  tolerate  another."  "There  is  no  law  but 
my  law;  there  is  no  will  but  my  will,"  he  told  his 
soldiers,  and,  "The  King's  will  is  the  highest  law," 
he  wrote  in  the  Golden  Book  of  Munich. 

And  so,  as  a  German  Professor,  Ludwig  Gur- 
litt,  has  said: 

He  regards  his  people,  the  masses,  as  children  not  yet 
of  age,  and  thinks  the  Government  competent  to  prescribe 
the  course  of  their  social  and  cultural  development — a 
profound  and  fatal  mistake  ...   a  mediaeval  idea ! 

Autocracy  makes  for  efficiency,  but  it  also  makes 
for  the  suppression  of  the  aspirations  of  the  people 
and  self-government.  But  if  the  Kaiser,  the  bu- 
reaucracy, and  an  emasculated  Parliament  were  the 
whole  system  of  goverimient,  autocracy  would  be 
incomplete.  The  system  would  crumble  away  as 
by  an  earthquake  when  democracy  became  success- 
ful at  the  polls. 

The  system,  therefore,  must  be  supported  by 
power  of  some  kind.  Without  power  behind  the 
throne,  or  behind  any  government,  autocratic,  mon- 
archical, or  republican,  that  goveiTiment  would  fall 
at  the  first  shock  of  internal  conflict.  In  a  real 
republic  that  power  is  the  will  of  the  people — com- 
monly called  public  opinion.  But  we  have  seen  that 
the  German  system  does  not  rest  upon  public  opin- 


144  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

ion.   Upon  what,  then?    William  II.,  indeed,  as  the 
"instrument  of  the  Lord,"  has  flaunted  his  own 
defiance  of  public  sentiment. 
Five  years  ago  he  said : 

Considering  myself  as  the  instrument  of  the  Lord,  and 
without  heeding  the  views  and  opinions  of  the  day,  I  go 
my  way. 

Behind  the  German  autocracy  is  the  army,  under 
the  absolute  conti^ol  of  the  Kaiser.  Upon  the  army 
the  Kaiser  depends  for  the  security  of  his  rule. 
The  army  is  the  power  behind  the  throne. 

As  one  writer  remarks: 

"The  army  is  the  foundation  of  the  social  structure  of 
the  empire." 

The  Kaiser,  on  one  occasion,  declared: 

With  grave  anxiety  I  placed  the  crown  upon  my  head. 
Everywhere  I  met  doubt,  and  the  whole  world  misjudged 
me.  But  one  had  confidence  in  me ;  but  one  believed  in 
me — that  was  the  army.  And  relying  upon  the  army,  and 
trusting  in  God,  I  began  my  reign,  knowing  well  that  the 
army  is  the  main  tower  of  strength  for  my  country,  the 
main  pillar  supporting  the  Prussian  throne,  to  which 
God  in  His  wisdom  had  called  me. 

He  said  in  1891 : 

The  soldier  and  the  army,  not  parliamentary  majorities 
and  decisions,  have  welded  together  the  German  Empire. 
My  confidence  is  in  the  army— as  my  grandfather  said 
at  Coblenz :  "These  are  the  gentlemen  on  whom  I  can 
rely." 

And  again,  asserting  his  belief  in  military  force 
as  the  means  upon  which  the  empire  must  rely  to 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  145 

accomplish  its  ends  at  home  and  abroad,  he  quoted 
the  saying  of  Frederick  WilHam  I.: 

If  one  wishes  to  decide  something  in  this  world,  it  is  not 
the  pen  alone  that  will  do  it  if  unsupported  by  the  power 
of  the  sword. 

In  his  first  official  act  as  Emperor  (June  15, 
1888),  he  declared: 

The  absolutely  inviolable  dependence  upon  the  war  lord 
(Kriegsherr)  is,  in  the  army,  the  inheritance  which 
descends  from  father  to  son,  from  generation  to  gener- 
ation. ...  So  we  are  bound  together,  I  and  the  army. 
Thus  we  are  born  for  one  another,  and  thus  we  will  hold 
together  in  an  indissoluble  bond,  in  peace  or  storm,  as 
God  wills. 

This  close  connection  between  the  army  and  the 
Prussian  Kings,  as  Professor  Gauss  points  out,  is 
a  tradition  which  William  II.  has  sedulously  main- 
tained, just  as  we  have  seen  he  has  maintained  the 
traditions  of  a  Divine  right  to  rule. 


V 

THE  kaiser's  sentiments 

With  the  meaning  of  all  these  prerogatives  in 
mind,  let  us  look  a  bit  more  closely  into  the  psychol- 
ogy of  the  Kaiser.  In  doing  so  let  us  bear  in  mind 
that  in  the  doctrine  of  Divine  right  we  see  devel- 
oped in  the  Kaiser  a  strong  sentiment  of  the  most 
personal  kind,  of  birthright,  of  self-interest.    And, 


146  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

besides  this,  in  all  the  other  prerogatives  which  the 
Kaiser  has  so  defiantly  resolved  to  defend  against 
all  encroachments,  we  also  have  sentiments  of  self- 
interest — sentiments  of  possession,  of  rights  per- 
taining to  self. 

All  these  sentiments  are  bound  up  with  a  con- 
sciousness of  his  own  personality  (a  "self -regard- 
ing" sentiment),  with  his  ego.  And  there  is  a 
great  deal  of  ego,  of  consciousness  of  his  ego,  in  his 
personality.  Perhaps  his  enemies  would  say,  as  was 
said  of  the  great  orang-utan,  Bimi,  in  Kipling's 
tale— Bimi,  who  also  wished  to  crush  his  enemies 
in  furious  outbursts  of  jealous  rage — "there  is  too 
much  ego  in  his  cosmos." 

Now,  as  a  matter  of  psychology,  "sentiments," 
as  I  have  already  said,  are  of  tremendous  impor- 
tance as  factors  in  personality  and  as  forces  which 
determine  attitudes  of  mind,  reactions  of  the  per- 
sonality to  the  environment  and  conduct. 

Upon  the  formation  of  "sentiments"  the  charac- 
ter of  a  person  and  his  social  behavior  fundamen- 
tally depend.  And  by  the  formation  of  sentiments 
in  the  course  of  the  individual's  mental  development 
the  primitive  innate  instincts  of  human  nature  are 
harnassed  and  brought  under  control  and  their  im- 
pulses given  proper  direction.  Thus  these  primitive 
impulses  are  repressed  or  cultivated  according  to 
the  ideals  of  society.  Otherwise,  driven  by  the  im- 
pulses of  our  innate  instincts,  we  should  all  run 
amuck  through  society. 

We  must  understand,  then,  a  little  more  pre- 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  147 

cisely  what,  psychologically  and  technically  speak- 
ing, a  sentiment  is.  I  am  not  using  the  word 
in  the  popular  sense.  Without  going  into  the  psy- 
chology deeply,  we  may  say  that  a  sentiment  is  an 
idea  of  something,  as  its  object,  organized  or  asso- 
ciated with  one  or  more  instinctive  emotions  which 
give  the  idea  impulsive  force. 

In  the  personality  of  every  human  being — and 
the  same  is  true  of  animals — there  are  a  number 
of  emotional  instincts.  These  instincts  are  char- 
acterized by  a  particular  emotion  which  each  pos- 
sesses, and  miay  be  named  indifferently,  for  our 
present  purposes,  either  after  the  emotion  itself  or 
after  the  biological  aim  which  the  instinct  serves. 

Every  person,  for  instance,  possesses  a  pugnacity 
instinct  of  which  the  emotion  is  anger.  Other  such 
instincts  are  fear,  parental  feeling,  disgust,  curi- 
osity, self-assertion,  self-abasement,  reproduction, 
and  so  on.  All  such  instincts  have  a  biological  func- 
tion in  that  they  serve  either  to  protect,  like  anger 
and  fear,  the  individual  (and  the  species)  from 
danger  against  its  enemies  and  prevent  its  extinc- 
tion, or,  like  the  parental  and  reproductive  instincts, 
serve  to  perpetuate  the  species,  or,  like  the  curios- 
ity instinct,  to  acquire  knowledge  and  learn  by  ex- 
perience, and  so  on.  Emotion,  as  the  very  word 
itself  indicates,  moves  us — i.  e.,  it  is  a  force  that 
impels  toward  some  end  and  the  emotion  of  each 
instinct  carries  it  to  fulfillment. 

When  an  emotion — i.  e.,  instinct — has  been  ex- 
cited by  some  object,  whether  it  be  a  material  thing, 


148  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

like  a  snake,  or  another  person,  or  something  mental 
— an  idea  of  a  material  object,  or  a  thought  as  of  a 
possible  danger  to  the  individual,  or  of  a  political 
principle — the  emotion  may  become  so  associated 
with  and  bound  to  the  object  that  whenever  the  ob- 
ject is  presented  in  consciousness  the  emotion  is 
excited.  This  particularly  happens  when  the  emo- 
tion has  been  frequently  excited  by  the  same  ob- 
ject. 

Thus  a  person  may  acquire  a  fear  of  snakes,  or 
thunderstorms,  or  hatred  of  a  person.  Two  or  more 
emotional  instincts  may  be  organized  in  this  way 
into  a  system  about  a  given  idea  as  their  object. 

Now,  when  an  idea  always  excites  one  or  more 
emotions,  so  that  the  idea  is  always  accompanied 
by  the  same  emotional  reaction,  the  whole  is  called 
a  sentiment.  Thus  we  have  the  sentiment  of  love 
of  a  mother  for  her  child,  of  hatred  of  a  tyrant, 
of  disgust  for  a  vicious  person,  of  pride  of  self, 
and  so  on. 

Practically,  psychological  analysis  shows  that  the 
organization  of  a  sentiment  is  more  complicated 
than  such  a  simple  arrangement  would  make  it, 
and  that  the  sentiment  is  deeply  and  widely  rooted 
in  a  number  of  ramifying,  previous  mental  experi- 
ences and  innate  emotions.  This  is  expressed  by 
popular  language  when  we  say  a  given  sentiment 
is  deeply  rooted  in  a  person's  personality.  The  emo- 
tions serve  to  give  their  ideas  great  intensity  and 
driving  force  for  action. 

It  is  held  by  some  psychologists  that  a  sentiment 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  149 

always  includes  innately  organized  systems  of  sev- 
eral emotions  so  that  a  different  emotion  is  neces- 
sarily excited  according  to  the  situation  in  which 
the  object  presents  itself.  Thus  a  hated  person 
will  awaken  in  us  joy,  or  sorrow,  or  anger,  or  fear, 
according  to  whether  he  suffers  injury,  or  escapes 
destruction,  or  prospers,  or  is  likely  to  get  the  bet- 
ter of  us. 

In  accordance  with  this  view  a  sentiment  is  an 
organized  system  of  emotions  centred  about  an  idea 
of  an  object.  The  mechanism,  as  I  have  stated  it, 
however,  is  sufficiently  accurate  for  our  purpose. 

With  these  general  principles  in  mind,  one  has 
only  to  read  the  Kaiser's  speeches  to  recognize  that 
his  ideas  of  himself  and  of  his  prerogatives,  which 
he  jealously  defends,  are  organized  with  instinctive 
emotions  of  great  intensity — emotions  belonging  to 
greed  of  possession,  and  pride,  and  self-assertion 
(or  self-display ) ,  and  pugnacity,  and  vengeful  emo- 
tion, and  jealousy.  These  ideas  are  therefore  sen- 
timents deeply  fixed  and  organized  in  his  person- 
ality, and  given  great  driving  force  by  their  emo- 
tions, which  tend  to  carry  them  to  activity  and  frui- 
tion. 

Hence  it  is  that  the  Kaiser's  sentiments  of  him- 
self and  his  prerogatives  exhibit  great  intensity  of 
feeling  and  determine  his  conduct  to  assert  his  rights 
and  to  exercise  and  enjoy  them  by  being  his  own 
Chancellor  and  ruling  the  army  and  empire,  and, 
if  need  be,  to  defend  them  most  vigorously. 


150  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

VI 

THE   kaiser's  self-regarding  SENTIMENT 

But  we  must  leave  these  traits  of  the  Kaiser's 
personality  for  the  immediate  issue  of  our  study. 
One  sentiment,  however,  ought  to  be  considered 
more  intimately  if  certain  of  his  most  notorious  pe- 
culiarities are  to  be  understood.  I  refer  to  what 
has  been  called  the  "self -regarding"  sentiment. 

Every  person  possesses  such  a  sentiment,  al- 
though it  varies  according  to  the  ingredients  that 
enter  into  it.  Professor  William  McDougall,  one 
of  the  most  eminent  of  contemporary  psychologists, 
has  analyzed  this  sentiment,  and  attributes  it  to  the 
biological  instincts  of  self-assertion  and  self-abase- 
ment compounded  in  varying  proportions  with  the 
idea  of  self.  (These  instincts  are  common  to  an- 
imals as  well  as  men  and  have  a  biological  end.) 
We  thus  get  different  types  of  self. 

When  the  first  instinct  of  self-assertion — also 
called  self-display — with  its  emotion  of  positive 
self -feeling  is  the  chief  instinct,  then  we  have  a  type 
in  which  pride  is  the  main  characteristic  of  the  idea 
of  self.  When  the  second  instinct  (with  the  emo- 
tion of  negative  self- feeling)  is  happily  blended  in 
the  sentiment,  we  have  a  type  of  self-respect. 

To  illustrate  the  former  type,  Professor  McDou- 
gall (Social  Psychology)  draws  the  character  of  an 
imaginary  Prince  in  whom  the  first  instinct  is  the 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  151 

dominating  one.    It  is  interesting  to  see  how  per- 
fectly his  picture  represents  the  Kaiser: 

Imagine  the  son  of  a  powerful  and  foolish  Prince  to  be 
endowed  with  great  capacities  and  to  have  in  great 
strength  the  instinct  of  self-display  with  its  emotion  of 
positive  self-feeling.  Suppose  that  he  is  never  checked, 
or  corrected,  or  criticised,  but  is  allowed  to  lord  it  over 
all  his  fellow-creatures  without  restraint.  The  self- 
regarding  sentiment  of  such  a  child  would  almost  neces- 
sarily take  the  form  of  an  unshakable  pride,  a  pride 
constantly  gratified  by  the  attitudes  of  deference,  grati- 
tude, and  admiration  of  his  social  environment ;  the  only 
dispositions  that  would  become  organized  in  this  senti- 
ment of  pride  would  be  those  of  positive  self-feeling  or 
elation  and  of  anger  (for  his  anger  would  be  invariabl}^ 
excited  when  any  one  failed  to  assume  toward  him  the 
attitude  of  subjection  or  deference). 

His  self-consciousness  might  be  intense  and  very  prom- 
inent, but  it  would  remain  poor  in  content;  for  he  could 
make  little  progress  in  self-knowledge ;  he  would  have 
little  occasion  to  hear,  or  to  be  interested  in,  the  judg- 
ments of  others  upon  himself ;  and  he  would  seldom  be  led 
to  reflect  upon  his  own  character  and  conduct.  The 
only  influences  that  could  moralize  a  man  so  endowed  and 
so  brought  up  would  be  either  religious  teaching,  which 
might  give  him  the  sense  of  a  power  greater  than  himself 
to  whom  he  was  accountable,  or  a  very  strong  natural  en- 
dowment of  the  tender  emotion  and  its  altruistic  impulse, 
or  a  conjunction  of  these  two  influences. 

A  man  in  whom  the  self-regarding  sentiment  had 
assumed  this  form  would  be  incapable  of  being  humbled — 
his  pride  could  only  be  mortified ;  that  is  to  say,  any  dis- 
play of  his  own  shortcomings  or  any  demonstration  of 
the  superiority  of  another  to  himself  could  cause  a  pain- 
ful check  to  his  positive  self-feeling  and  a  consequent 
anger,  but  could  give  rise  neither  to  shame  nor  to  humilia- 
tion, nor  to  any  affective  state,  such  as  admiration,  grati- 
tude, or   reverence,   in   which  negative   self-feeling  plays 


152  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

a  part.  And  he  would  be  indifferent  to  moral  praise  or 
blame;  for  the  disposition  of  negative  self- feeling  would 
have  no  place  in  his  self-regarding  sentiment;  and  nega- 
tive self-feeling,  which  renders  us  observant  of  the  atti- 
tude of  others  toward  ourselves  and  receptive  toward 
their  opinions,  is  one  of  the  essential  conditions  of  the 
influence  of  praise  and  blame  upon  us. 

The  inordinate  cultivation  in  the  Kaiser  of  the 
self -regarding  sentiment  with  the  unalloyed  instinct 
of  self-display  also  explains,  psychologically,  the 
manifestations  of  certain  traits  which  have  amazed 
the  world.  I  mean  his  colossal  vanity  as  mani- 
fested by  his  fondness  for  dressing  himself  up  in 
all  sorts  of  uniforms  and  constantly  changing  his 
costumes — on  occasions  as  often  as  five  or  six  times 
in  a  single  day,  and  even  during  the  course  of  a 
Court  reception — his  fondness  for  having  himself 
photographed  or  painted,  or  his  portrait  made  as 
busts,  lithographs,  medals,  and  bas-reliefs,  always 
posing  in  heroic  attitudes  for  the  purpose. 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  the  snap-shots  of  the 
Kaiser  with  the  posed  photographs  (there  are  thou- 
sands of  photographs  of  him ) ,  and  not  only  as  him- 
self, but  in  the  heroic  character  of  a  Roman  Em- 
peror mounted  on  a  charger,  and  again  in  imitation 
of  the  Emperor  Charlemagne. 

It  explains  his  self-assumption  to  be  an  artist — 
a  painter,  a  musician,  a  composer,  an  architect,  an 
art  critic,  a  preacher,  and  Heaven  knows  what  else. 
It  also  gives  a  psychological  explanation  of  his 
inability  to  stand  personal  criticism,  and  for  his 
vain  obtuseness  in  not  being  able  to  understand  how 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  153 

any  one  should  not  look  upon  him  excepting  with 
reverent  awe.  One  of  the  authors  of  "The  Kaiser" 
cites  the  following  two  incidents. 

One  of  his  subjects  had  been  sentenced  to  prison 
for  hinting  something  disrespectful  about  his  sov- 
ereign : 

William  was  genuinely  amazed  that  such  an  unnatural 
crime  could  ever  have  been  committed.  He  "read  and 
reread  the  papers  in  the  case  with  the  closest  attention" ; 
and  finally  said  to  the  waiting  official:  "It  would  seem 
that  this  man  hitherto  has  not  been  a  crimnal — son  of 
respectable  parents,  himself  in  a  respectable  walk  of  life, 
with  a  good  education.  And  yet- — how  do  you  explain 
this — this  insult  to  the  Anointed  of  the  Lord?  Strange! 
Strange !" 

On  another  occasion: 

After  reading  a  speech  of  the  Socialist  leader  Bebel, 
containing  some  animadversion  upon  himself,  he  turned 
to  the  officer  in  attendance  with  clouded  brow  and  flash- 
ing eye,  and  remarked  in  a  voice  trembling  with  passion: 
"And  all  this  to  me!  To  me!  What  is  the  country 
coming  to?" 

This  self -regarding  sentiment  is  also  at  the  bot- 
tom of  that  .dominating  trait — love  of  power — 
which  has  led  him  to  aspire  to  world  power  and  to 
believe  that  with  his  army  and  with  a  stronger  navy, 
toward  the  upbuilding  of  which  he  has  directed  un- 
tiringly his  energies,  he  could  conquer  the  world.  It 
even  led  him  to  think  of  conquering  the  United 
States,  for  when  we  were  engaged  in  war  with 
Spain  he  declared,  as  I  have  authority  for  saying, 
"If  I  had  had  a  larger  fleet  I  would  have  taken 


154  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Uncle  Sam  by  the  scruff  of  the  neck."* 

That  this  saying  of  the  Kaiser's  meant  more  than 
mere  momentary  ebullition  of  petulant  feeling  or 
a  thoughtless  boast  becomes  manifest  when  we  bear 
in  mind  that  it  was  made  towards  the  end  of  June, 
1898,  after  the  arrival  of  Vice- Admiral  von  Died- 
rich  and  his  fleet  at  Manila  on  June  12.  It  is  sig- 
nificant that  von  Diedrich,  when  asked  by  Dewey 
why  so  large  a  German  naval  force — five  ships,  a 
more  powerful  force  than  that  of  the  American 
fleet — was  present,  replied,  "I  am  here  by  order 
of  the  Kaiser,  sir,"  and  the  same  explanation  has 
been  given  since.  We  know  now  that  there  was 
an  attempt  made  to  form  a  coalition  of  Continental 
monarchies  against  the  United  States  to  intervene 
in  the  war  in  favor  of  Spain,  but  that  it  was  blocked 
by  England  who,  there  is  evidence  to  show,  threat- 

*  In  a  letter  to  the  author,  July  7,  1898,  Joseph  Chamberlain,  then 
Colonial  Secretary  of  Great  Britain,  wrote: 

"Of  course  you  will  win,  and  will  be  able  to  dictate  terms  to  Spain. 
The  Continental  Powers  will  not  interfere  because  England  will  not 
join  them.  I  am  certain  that  if  opinion  here  had  been  different  to 
what  it  is,  j'^ou  would  have  had  to  face  a  European  coalition. 

"A  fortnight  ago  {do  not  quote  me  as  the  authority)  the  German 
Emperor  said  to  a  friend  of  mine,  'If  I  had  had  a  large  fleet  I 
would  have  taken  Uncle  Sam  b}^  the  scruff  of  the  neck' — and  this 
represents  the  view  of  the  older  monarchies  who  begin  to  desire  a 
Monroe  Doctrine  for  Europe.  But,  in  view  of  the  attitude  of  this 
country,  they  dare  not  move. 

"You  are  therefore  free  to  work  out  your  destiny." 

I  have  now  been  fully  authorized  to  publish  this  letter.  It  was 
printed  in  full  in  the  New  York  Tribune  of  April  28,  1917.  There  is 
much  other  corroborative  evidence,  which  is  undoubtedly  accessible, 
of  this  attempt  to  form  a  European  coalition  against  the  United 
States  and  of  its  being  blocked  by  England.  (See  letter  of  Mr.  G. 
Creighton  Webb,  in  the  New  York  Times,  June,  2,  1915.) 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  155 

ened  to  place  her  navy  on  the  side  of  this  country. 
Consequently  Germany  and  the  other  Powers  dared 
not  move.  As  it  was  we  came  to  the  brink  of  war 
in  July  through  the  action  of  von  Diedrich  in  inter- 
fering, after  the  battle  of  Manila,  May  1,  with  the 
blockade  by  Dewey.* 

The  remark  of  the  Kaiser  that  he  "would  have 
taken  Uncle  Sam  by  the  scruff  of  the  neck"  must 
be  taken  in  connection  with  all  .the  events  of  the 
time  and  particularly  with  the  attempt  to  form  a 
European  coalition  against  the  United  States  which 
probably  would  have  been  successful  had  it  not 
been  for  the  action  of  England. 

And  so  this  same  self-regarding  sentiment,  dis- 
torted and  unbalanced,  in  co-operation  with  other 
sentiments,  led  him  in  1914  to  have  contempt  for 
the  other  Powers  and  to  believe  that  he  had  a  strong 
enough  ai-my  to  terrify  Russia  and  her  ally,  France, 
into  submission,  and  so  he  gave  Austria  authority 
to  take  Servia  "by  the  scruff  of  the  neck";  to  feel, 
in  case  the  gleam  of  the  "shining  armour"  and  the 
clang  of  the  rattling  sabre  did  not  suffice,  that  he 
had  a  strong  enough  army  to  take  Russia  "by  the 

*  It  has  come  to  light  that  events  went  so  far  that  a  German  ship, 
it  has  been  reported,  cleared  for  action  and  Dewey,  in  the  famous 
choleric  interview  (July  10)  with  the  German  Admiral's  representa- 
tive, Flag-Lieutenant  v.  Hintzer,  threatened  war  if  Germany  wanted 
it.  This  part  of  the  interview  was  thus  reported  to  Mr.  John  Barrett 
by  "one  of  the  officers  of  the  Olympia  who  heard  the  conversation": 
"If  the  German  Government"  (said  Dewey)  "has  decided  to  make 
war  on  the  United  States,  or  has  any  intention  of  making  war,  and 
has  so  informed  your  Admiral,  it  is  his  duty  to  let  me  know.  .  .  . 
But  whether  he  intends  to  fight  or  not  I  am  ready."  {Admiral  George 
Dewey,  by  John  Barrett:  1899:  p.  115.) 


156  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

scruff  of  the  neck,"  and  so  he  declared  war  against 
that  country;  to  feel  that  he  had  a  strong  enough 
army  to  take  France  "by  the  scruff  of  the  neck," 
and  so  he  declared  war  against  France;  to  feel 
that  he  had  a  strong  enough  army  to  take  Belgium 
"by  the  scruff  of  the  neck,"  and  so  he  invaded  that 
country  with  his  army;  and  it  led  him  more  than 
twenty  years  ago  to  believe  that  some  day  he  would 
have  a  strong  enough  navy  to  take  England  "by 
the  scruff  of  the  neck,"  and  so  he  builded  and  build- 
ed  his  navy  and  drank  to  "Der  Tag." 

Of  course,  the  Kaiser's  hypertrophied  and  one- 
sided self -regarding  sentiment  was  not  the  sole  psy- 
chological factor  in  determining  his  attiude  of  mind 
towards  the  United  States  and  the  other  Powers. 
There  were  many  factors,  but  it  was  one;  and  it 
accounts  for  his  notorious  contempt  for  other  na- 
tions and  at  that  time,  particularly,  for  the  United 
States.  There  were  also  sentiments  of  World- 
power  and  Empire,  of  German  Kultur  and  War- 
Worship;  a  desire  to  have  a  "place  in  the  sun,"  to 
possess  colonies  and,  in  particular,  the  Philippines 
and  those  of  England  and  France;  and  to  extend 
the  German  Empire  to  the  ^gean  Sea  on  the  south 
and  the  North  Sea  on  the  north. 

The  self-regarding  sentiment,  obviously,  has 
played  also  a  large  part  in  the  Divine  Right  De- 
lusion, in  co-operation  with  the  wishes  we  have  con- 
sidered, forming  a  large  ego-centric  complex. 

Such,  and  other  manifestations  of  the  Kaiser's 
self -regarding  sentiment,  due  to  the  impulsive  force 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  157 

of  its  highly  developed  instinct  of  self -display  (self- 
assertion),  would  make  this  element  of  his  person- 
ality an  interesting  psychological  study  by  itself. 
I  merely  wish  now  to  point  out  that  it  is  the  extreme 
type  of  this  sentiment  that  is  responsible  for  many 
of  his  extravagances  of  speech  and  action,  and  that 
it  plays  a  part,  as  we  shall  see,  in  his  reactions  to 
democracy. 


VII 


AIMS  OF  THE  GERMAN  DEMOCRACY 

Now  let  us  return  to  the  Kaiser's  hatred  of 
democracy.  This  also  is  a  sentiment  organized  with 
several  emotional  instincts,  etc.,  which  we  need  not 
bother  about  here.  That  he  has  a  hatred  of  de- 
mocracy is  obvious. 

But  why? 

To  know  that  he  has  a  hatred  is  not  enough.  We 
want  it  explained,  to  know  why.  It  is  not  a  suf- 
ficient explanation  to  say  that  he  disbelieves  in  the 
principles  of  democracy.  That  would  not  be  suffi- 
cient to  account  for  the  development  of  the  senti- 
ment of  hatred  and  for  the  reaction  of  anger  which 
democracy  excites.  What  created  the  hatred?  For 
so  much  emotion  there  must  be  a  deeper-lying  cause 
— some  hidden  sentiment  which,  we  may  suspect, 
conflicts  with  the  sentiments  of  his  cherished  pre- 
rogatives and  his  self-regarding  sentiment. 

We  want  to  know  the  Why.    With  this  object 


158  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

let  us  consider  the  object  of  the  hatred — the  aims 
of  the  party  of  democracy,  one  of  the  great  pohti- 
cal  forces  in  Prussia  and  the  empire;  one  with 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Emperor  has  been  pas- 
sionately in  conflict  since  his  accession  to  the  throne. 
We  cannot  understand  the  psychological  reaction 
of  the  Emperor  without  understanding  the  aims  and 
the  potential  power  of  this  political  force.  For  this 
purpose  I  shall  have  to  ask  the  reader  to  bear  for 
a  moment  with  a  slight  digression,  keeping  in  mmd 
what  has  been  said  about  the  Kaiser's  sentiments 
until  we  return  to  our  main  theme. 

What  does  the  Social  Democratic  Party  stand 
for  and  in  what  respect  are  its  aims  antagonistic 
to  the  Emperor's  prerogatives  and  the  German  sys- 
tem of  government  ?  The  party  is  widely  regarded 
in  the  United  States,  I  am  constrained  to  believe, 
as  the  party  of  socialism.  But  this  idea  needs  con- 
siderable modification.  Indeed,  so  much  so  that 
the  party  would,  if  its  aims  were  understood,  re- 
ceive the  moral  support  of  Americans. 

Socialism  has  an  ominous  sound  to  American 
ears.  The  word  has  a  stigma  for  many  and  is  cal- 
culated to  repel.  At  one  time  in  its  early  history 
Marxian  Socialism,  formulated  by  Marx  himself 
as  "the  social  ownership  of  the  means  of  production 
and  distribution,"  was  the  dominating  aim  of  the 
German  Socialist  Party. 

But  times  have  changed.  The  aims  of  the  party 
have  undergone  various  metamorphoses  as  the  re- 
sult of  conflicts  of  factions  within,  fusions  and  po- 


The  PsycJiology  of  the  Kaiser  159 

litical  evolution.  Since  the  Kaiser  came  to  the 
throne  in  1888  a  revolution  has  taken  place  in  the 
aims,  methods,  tactics,  and  programs  of  the  party. 
In  accordance  with  this  change,  in  1890,  the  name 
was  changed  to  the  Social  Democratic  Party.  So- 
cialism has  been  relegated  to  the  background  and 
democracy  has  become  the  paramount  aim  and  is- 
sue. 

In  other  words,  the  principles  of  the  socialist, 
Marx,  have  given  place  to  those  of  the  brilliant 
democratic  leader,  Lassalle.  Both  men  are  dead, 
but  democracy  survives.  As  one  authority  (S.  P. 
Orth)  puts  it,  "Marx  is  a  tradition,  democracy  is 
an  issue." 

To-day  one  hears  very  little  of  Marx  and  a  great 
deal  of  "legislation"  based  on  democratic  princi- 
ples: 

The  last  election  (1912),  with  its  brilliant  victory  for 
Social  Democracy,  was  not  won  on  the  general  issues  of 
the  Erfurter  program,  but  on  the  particular  issue  of 
the  arrogance  of  the  bureaucracy  and  ballot  reform. 

Marxian  propagandism  has  been  sloughed  off. 
But  even  if  the  Democratic  Party  still  stood  for 
socialism  as  its  paramount  aim  this  fact  would  not 
necessarily  make  it  antagonistic  to  the  Emperor's 
prerogatives  or  the  German  system  of  government. 
The  State  might  become  engaged  in  all  sorts  of 
individual  enterprises  without  the  fundamental 
structure  of  Government  becoming  altered.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  Germany  is  to-day  the  most  so- 
cialized nation  in  the  world. 


160  The  Creed  of  DeutscJitiim 

We  will  not  stop  to  inquire  into  the  origin  of  this 
State  Socialism.  It  does  not  matter  for  our  pur- 
poses that  these  State  socialistic  measures  were  of- 
fered as  a  "bribe,"  to  use  Bismarck's  term,  to  the 
Social  Democrats  to  cease  agitation  against  the  gov- 
ernment, and  that  the  Emperor  long  ago  dropped 
this  policy  when  he  found  that  the  Social  Demo- 
crats would  not  be  bribed.  They  would  have  none 
of  these  measures.  They  wanted  political  rights, 
political  freedom  of  thought  and  speech,  and  the 
right  to  manage  their  own  government  just  as  we 
do  ours  in  the  United  States. 

The  German  State  owns  railroad,  canal  and  river 
transportation,  telegraph  and  telephone  systems, 
harbors  and  a  parcel  post.  It  conducts  banks,  in- 
surance, savings  banks,  and  pawnshops.  It  admin- 
isters sick  and  accident  insurance  and  old-age  pen- 
sions. The  municipalities  own  public  utilities  of 
all  kinds,  theatres,  markets,  and  warehouses. 

The  State,  or  municipality,  obviously  might  go 
further  and  administer  iron,  coal,  and  manufactur- 
ing enterprises;  it  might  undertake  all  sorts  of  so- 
cialistic functions  without  altering  one  whit  the  pre- 
rogatives of  the  Crown,  or  of  Parliament,  or  of  the 
relations  of  the  Government  to  the  people.  Gov- 
ernmental autocracy  would  still  exist  and  very 
likely  would  administer  these  industrial  enterprises 
with  the  same  satisfying  efficiency  with  which  it  ad- 
ministers everything  else  it  has  taken  hold  of. 

The  intense  anger  and  hatred  with  which  the  Em- 
peror reacts  to  the  Social  Democrats  cannot,  there- 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  161 

fore,  be  explained  by  the  principles  of  socialism 
per  se,  although  he  may  disbelieve  in  extreme  Marx- 
ian socialism.  Even  if  these  were  still  the  aim  of 
the  party,  there  must  be  some  other  explanation 
that  a  Social  Democrat  should  be  stigmatized  as  an 
enemy  of  the  empire,  of  religion  and  God,  to  be 
shot  down  by  the  army  if  his  party  became  too 
strong. 

Let  us  examine  then  the  demands  as  given  in  the 
latest  program  (1912)  of  the  Social  Democrats  and 
some  of  the  legislation  for  which  they  have  fought. 
The  demands  are  given  in  fourteen  articles. 

Number  one  demands  equal  opportunities  for  all, 
special  privileges  to  none — good  American  doc- 
trine. Number  two  relates  to  reform  of  the  ballot 
laws  and  has  been  the  main  immediate  issue.  "Uni- 
versal, direct,  equal,  secret  ballot"  is  demanded — 
also  American  doctrine.  Owing  to  the  present  in- 
equality of  the  ballot  the  Democrats  have  been  bad- 
ly handicapped  in  that  they  cannot  elect  their  pro- 
portionate number  of  representatives. 

Number  three  relates  to  the  existing  system  of 
government.  A  true  Parliamentary  Government 
is  demanded,  and  a  Ministry,  like  that  of  England, 
responsible  to  Parliament,  instead  of  the  present 
autocratic  system  by  which  the  Ministry  is  respon- 
sible only  to  the  Emperor.  Also,  it  is  demanded 
that  "the  power  to  declare  war  or  mmntain  peace" 
he  given  to  the  lower  house  (Reichstag).  Consent 
of  the  Reichstag  to  all  State  appropriations  (as 
with  the  House  of  Commons  and  the  American 


162  The  Creed  of  Beutschtum 

Congress). 

Numbers  four  and  five  relate  respectively  to  the 
organization  of  the  army  and  reform  of  adminis- 
trative justice,  abolishing  class  privilege  at  law,  etc. 
Number  six  demands  the  "right  to  combine,  meet, 
and  organize."  Number  seven  relates  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  national  Department  of  Labor,  fac- 
tory inspection,  and  a  legalized  universal  eight- 
hour  day,  etc.  Number  eight  relates  to  reform  of 
the  industrial  insurance  laws,  and  lowering  the  age 
of  old-age  pensions  from  70  to  Q5,  etc. 

Number  nine:  complete  religious  freedom.  Sep- 
aration of  Church  and  State.  No  support  of  any 
kind  for  religious  purposes  from  public  funds — 
good  American  doctrine  again.  Number  ten  de- 
mands universal  free  schools.  Number  eleven  re- 
lates to  reform  of  taxation  demanding  abolition  of 
indirect  taxes  and  taxes  on  necessities  of  life  and 
reduction  of  tariif  on  those  schedules  which  encour- 
age trusts. 

Number  twelve  supports  "measures  that  tend  to 
develop  commerce  and  trade."  Number  thirteen: 
"A  graduated  income,  property  and  inheritance 
tax"  in  order  to  dampen  "the  ardor  of  the  rich  for 
a  constantly  increasing  army  and  navy."  Number 
fourteen:  "Internal  improvements  and  coloniza- 
tion"; but  the  "cessation  of  foreign  colonization 
now  done  for  the  purpose  of  exploiting  foreign  peo- 
ples for  the  sake  of  gain." 

The  first  thing  that  will  strike  the  reader  is  the 
absence  of  anything  essentially  socialistic  in  the 


The  Psijcliology  of  the  Kaiser  163 

principles  formulated  in  this  program.  They  are 
rather  what  we  in  this  country  would  call  "Repub- 
lican," "Progressive,"  and  "Democratic."  They 
are  not  nearly  as  socialistic  as  many  of  the  functions 
now  undertaken  by  the  German  State.  With  the 
exception  of  those  articles  that  relate  exclusively  to 
German  conditions  (such  as  numbers  four  and 
eight)  and  the  abolition  of  indirect  taxation,  they 
express  good  American  doctrine  and  are,  for  the 
most  part,  axiomatic  in  this  country. 

No  American  and  no  Englishman  would  see  any- 
thing in  them  to  get  excited  about,  although  he 
might  hold  a  different  opinion  about  the  expedi- 
ency of  one  or  the  other  demand.  Undoubtedly  the 
spirit  of  German  democracy  goes  further  than  the 
program,  especially  in  particular  parts  of  Ger- 
many ;  nevertheless  this  program  formulates  the  de- 
mands of  the  national  party. 

Between  the  American  Republic  and  German 
democracy  there  is,  or  should  be,  a  bond  of  common 
sympathy,  the  bond  of  common  political  ideals  and 
common  purpose — the  love  of  political  and  relig- 
ious liberty,  freedom  of  thought,  freedom  of  speech, 
and  freedom  of  the  press  without  fear  of  imprison- 
ment or  punishment  under  "lese-majeste"  or  any 
power  of  the  State;  the  emancipation  of  mankind 
from  the  tyranny  of  autocracy;  the  "right  to  life, 
liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness"  according 
to  the  dictates  of  the  individual  conscience ;  the  rule 
of  the  people  and  not  of  an  autocracy,  the  subor- 
dination of  the  State  to  the  will  of  the  people — 


164  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

and  to  this  end  government  based  not  upon  an 
army,  but  upon  public  opinion  as  expressed  by  the 
votes  of  the  people. 

When  these  ideals  and  purposes  of  the  German 
democracy  are  realized  in  the  United  States,  Amer- 
ican public  opinion  will  have  the  strongest  ties  of 
sympathy  with  the  great  masses  of  Germany,  strug- 
gling for  these  ends  against  an  intrenched  "State." 

Between  German  democracy  and  American  pub- 
lic sentiment  there  can  be  no  conflict.  It  is  only 
with  the  autocratic  classes  that  there  can  be  an- 
tagonism, but  the  autocratic  classes  mean  the  State 
as  an  artificially  created  entity  isolated  from  and 
distinct  from  the  masses  of  the  people. 

Why,  then,  does  the  Emperor  almost  alone,  even 
among  Germans,  react  to  the  ideals  of  democracy 
with  such  passion,  such  anger,  and  such  hatred  ?  On 
psychological  grounds  we  can  anticipate  that  such 
emotion  must  be  for  personal  reasons  and  because 
they  strike  some  intense  emotional  sentiment. 

We  find  the  key  to  the  puzzle  when  we  come  to 
examine  Articles  3  and  4.  Number  three  has  been 
the  paramount  issue  of  the  democracy — it  is  its 
foundation  stone.  Number  two,  the  reform  of  the 
ballot,  while  the  main  political  issue  of  the  day,  is 
only  a  means  to  this  end. 

The  fundamental  issue  is  (1)  a  true  Parliamen- 
tary Government,  with  parliamentary  power  in  con- 
formity with  modern  democratic  ideas,  such  as  ob- 
tains in  England;  and  (2)  the  abolition  of  a  Chan- 
cellor and  Ministry  appointed  by  the  Kaiser  and 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  165 

responsible  only  to  the  Kaiser  and  the  substitution 
of  a  Government  responsible  to  Parliament.  Thus 
the  Government  and  the  army  would  be  responsible 
to  the  people  and  rest  upon  public  opinion. 

This  democratic  principle  seems  to  our  ideas  not 
only  harmless  enough,  but  a  matter  of  course  and 
only  the  expression  of  the  age  we  live  in.  But  to 
the  Kaiser  it  means  a  personal  cataclysm.  It  means 
the  abolition  of  the  greatest  of  the  Kaiser's  pre- 
rogatives; it  means  the  denial  of  the  Divine  Right 
of  Kings;  it  means  the  downfall  of  the  House  of 
Hohenzollern,  in  that  it  means  the  reduction  of 
the  prerogatives  of  the  house  to  reigning  without 
governing. 

He  could  be  no  longer  his  own  Chancellor,  as 
he  is  recognized  generally  to  be  to-day  in  fact.  His 
wings  would  be  clipped.  He  would  be  shorn  of 
autocratic  power.  He  could  no  longer  dictate  pol- 
icies of  government.  The  will  of  the  people  would 
rule.  What  would  be  the  use  of  a  ''divine  right" 
to  sit  as  a  social  ornament  upon  a  throne  and  watch 
the  people  rule? 

Furthermore,  his  "self-regarding  sentiment," 
characterized  by  the  instinct  of  self-assertion  and 
the  emotion  of  pride,  would  receive  an  unbearable 
rebuff.  He  would  no  longer  be  the  central  figure 
in  Europe,  overlording  all  other  rulers  by  his  per- 
sonality, his  autocratic  power,  and  his  prerogatives. 
The  conflict  between  the  Kaiser  and  the  democracy 
thus  becomes  a  personal  conflict  on  his  part. 


166  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 


VIII 

THE  REAL  CAUSE  OF  THE  KAISER's  ANTIPATHY 

Gathering  together  the  facts  which  we  have  col- 
lated, we  have  found  in  the  Kaiser  intensely  strong 
sentiments  of  his  prerogatives,  an  almost  abnormal 
self -regarding  sentiment,  and  a  powerful,  steadily 
growing  political  party  acting  in  antagonism  to 
those  sentiments  and  threatening  in  case  of  success 
to  rob  him  of  his  prerogatives. 

Now,  with  these  facts  in  mind,  let  us  analyze  the 
antecedent  contents  of  the  Kaiser's  mind  a  little 
more  intimately.  If  he  has  been  a  thinking  being 
at  all,  we  know,  in  view  of  the  political  and  his- 
torical facts  we  have  studied — any  assertion  to  the 
contrary  would  meet  with  incredulous  skepticism — 
there  have  been  thoughts,  however  fleeting,  of  what 
would  happen  to  himself  and  his  house  if  the  demo- 
cratic reforms  should  prevail;  thoughts  of  being 
robbed  of  his  prerogatives,  robbed  of  his  power  to 
rule  the  Kingdom  of  Prussia,  to  rule  the  Imperial 
Bundesrat  by  his  power  as  King  of  Prussia,  to  rule 
the  Reichstag  through  the  Bundesrat;  thoughts  of 
being  robbed  of  the  prerogatives  to  be  his  own 
Chancellor,  to  appoint  his  own  Ministry,  to  control 
the  army,  to  be  independent  of  Parliament  and  pub- 
lic opinion  and  the  public  will — in  short,  robbed  of 
being  an  autocratic  ruler  of  the  Kingdom  of  Prus- 
sia and  the  German  Empire  by  Divine  Right. 


The  Psijchologii  of  the  Kaiser  167 

And  there  has  been  a  full  realization  of  the  in- 
creasing power  of  democracy,  steadily  growing  in 
numbers,  and  rising,  swelling,  year  by  year,  like  a 
great  irresistible  tidal  wave,  threatening  sooner  or 
later  to  carry  all  before  it  and  overwhelm  the  sys- 
tem of  autocracy.  And  against  this  growing  ava- 
lanche of  ballots  of  the  democracy  he  sees  no  de- 
fense for  himself  save  the  army,  and  so  he  calls 
upon  his  soldiers  to  be  prepared  to  "shoot  down 
your  own  relatives,  brothers,  and  even  parents  in 
the  streets,"  when  he  shall  give  the  word  of  com- 
mand. 

Such  thoughts  and  such  realizations  of  future 
danger  could  not  but  excite  the  biological  defensive 
instinct  of  fear.  And  this  instinct,  being  associated 
with  its  object,  the  idea  of  democracy,  forms  a  sen- 
timent, the  fear  of  democracy.  This  sentiment  is 
further  associated  with  or  ciystallized  about  other 
egoistic  sentiments  of  self  and  his  House  and  his 
prerogatives.  Hence  it  may  be  described  as  a  fear 
of  democracy  because  of  the  danger  to  himself  and 
his  House  of  Hohenzollern,  a  fear  of  being  deprived 
by  the  hands  of  the  democracy  of  his  prerogative  to 
be  an  autocrat.  It  is  a  fear  of  democracy,  not  for 
Germany  but  for  himself.  He  fears  for  his  own 
life,  so  to  speak,  for,  if  you  rob  him  of  his  preroga- 
tives, do  you  not  take  away  that  which  to  him  is 
his  life? 

This  does  not  mean  that  he  is  aware  of  this  very 
personal  egoistic  or  egocentric  fear-sentiment.  He 
undoubtedly  would  not  admit  it  to  others,  nor  is  it 


168  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

likely  that  he  could,  even  if  he  would,  admit  it  to 
himself,  because  it  has  not  been  squarely  faced,  but 
has  been  thrust  aside,  repressed  bj^  the  pride  of  his 
self -regarding  sentiment  and  not  allowed  to  come 
to  the  full  light  of  consciousness.  Though  not  rec- 
ognized by  himself,  it  is  there  all  the  same,  repressed 
into  the  subconscious,  or,  if  you  prefer,  in  the  back- 
ground of  the  mind  (which,  after  all,  is  a  part 
of  the  subconscious ) . 

Repressed  into  the  subconscious,  it  is  there  neces- 
sarily intimately  systematized  with,  and  has  deep 
roots  in,  the  many  associated  antecedent  thoughts 
that,  as  we  have  seen,  gave  rise  to  it.  So  long  as 
these  so-called  psycho-genetic  thoughts  are  there 
unmodified — conserved  also,  like  a  phonographic 
record,  in  the  subconscious — ^he  could  not  get  rid 
of  his  fixed  fear  of  the  democracy  if  he  would. 

In  this  light  his  famous  declaration  of  his  pre- 
rogative, "I  am  the  Supreme  War  Lord,"  receives 
deeper  meaning  when  at  the  same  time  we  remem- 
ber he  is  the  head  of  that  autocracy  that  wields  the 
power.  We  can  see  into  the  background  of  his 
mind.  He  sees  the  danger,  we  see  the  fear.  We 
see,  too,  in  the  background  of  his  mind  a  realiza- 
tion of  a  growing  democracy,  and  we  find  there 
upon  what  methods  he  relies  if  the  German  democ- 
racy should  win  at  the  polls  and  change  the  Con- 
stitution. To  oppose  the  will  of  the  people  he  has 
the  army.  And  we  see  into  his  inner  consciousness 
when  he  prepared  (as  already  quoted)  the  minds 
of  his  young  soldiers  for  "the  day." 


The  Psychology  of  the  Kaiser  1()9 

IX 

THE   KAISER^S  ANTIPATHY  AN   OBSESSION   AND   A  DE- 
FENSE REACTION 

Now  let  US  go  one  step  further.  Although  this 
egocentric  sentiment  of  fear  for  himself  and  his 
dynasty  is  repressed  into  the  subconscious,  it  is  not 
for  that  reason  inert  and  incapable  of  affecting  his 
conscious  processes.  On  the  contrary,  as  we  are 
forced  to  believe  from  the  result  of  psychological 
investigations  into  such  conditions  of  personality,  it 
determines  many  of  his  conscious  processes  of 
thought,  of  his  political  principles  and  his  activities 
against  his  most  dangerous  political  enemy. 

In  the  first  place,  it  induces  a  defense  reaction 
of  an  intensely  emotional  character  which  aims  to 
direct  his  activities  in  a  direction  that  will  protect 
him  against  the  dangers  of  democracy.  This  de- 
fense reaction  is  anger  and  the  sentiment  of  hatred. 

It  should  be  explained  that  psychological  analy- 
sis of  the  emotions  goes  to  show  that  the  sentiment 
of  hatred  is  made  up  of  several  emotions  associated 
with  its  object,  of  at  least  fear  and  anger  and  venge- 
ful emotions,' which  last  also  includes  anger  besides 
that  most  conspicuous  trait  of  the  Kaiser — the  self- 
regarding  sentiment. 

The  way  the  defense  reaction  comes  into  play  is 
this:  The  instinctive  emotions  and  their  sentiments 
are  awakened  and  recur  from  time  to  time  when- 


170  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

ever  the  subconscious  egoistic  sentiment  or  any  of 
its  associated  psychogenetic  thoughts — those  of  his 
possible  fall  from  power — is  touched.  The  senti- 
ments of  fear  he  will  not  admit  to  himself,  and 
they  are  repressed  as  such;  but  the  fear-emotion 
appears  in  consciousness  disguised  as  hatred,  of 
which  it  is  a  component.  Anger  against  and  hatred 
of  democracy  he  is  prepared  to  admit.  They  are 
fully  faced  and  rise  into  the  full  light  of  conscious- 
ness, although  their  real  underlying  cause  is  hid- 
den. 

Such  an  intensely  fixed  emotional  idea  (hatred), 
recurring  whenever  its  object  is  presented  to  con- 
sciousness, is,  in  principle,  an  obsession,  although 
it  may  not  be  so  beyond  control  as  to  be  pathologi- 
cal. But,  as  in  the  Kaiser's  case,  it  may  be  only 
the  apparent  obsession,  i.  e.,  a  defense  reaction  to 
the  real  obsession  hidden  in  the  subconscious.  The 
Kaiser's  real  obsession  is  a  subconscious  phobia^  a 
fear  of  democracy  for  himself  and  his  House. 

It  is  interesting  to  notice  in  this  connection  how 
the  national  hatred  of  one  nation  for  another  is  rec- 
ognized by  popular  language  as  a  phobia  or  fear. 
We  speak  of  an  Anglo-phobia,  of  a  Russo-phobia, 
to  describe  the  hatred  of,  let  us  say,  Germany  for 
England  and  Russia.  Though  the  nation  would 
not  admit  being  afraid,  nevertheless,  by  the  very 
term  employed,  it  is  popularly  recognized  that  the 
hatred  is  really  though  unconsciously  the  expression 
of  a  fear. 

In  the  case  of  the  Kaiser's  phobia  of  democracy, 


The  Psijchologii  of  the  Kaiser  171 

the  impulsive  forces  of  the  biological  instincts  of 
pugnacity  (anger),  fear,  self-assertion,  etc.,  pro- 
vide the  energy  of  the  fighting  spirit  and  carry  to 
fruition  his  political  ideas  aimed  at  repressing  the 
Social  Democrats.  This  is  exemplified  by  the 
Kaiser's  exhortations,  threats,  and  epithets  hurled 
in  his  speeches  at  these  alone  of  his  political  ene- 
mies, and  by  the  laws  enacted  and  the  use  of  the 
lese-majeste  to  suppress  them.  By  suppressing  the 
Social  Democracy  he  is  defended  from  his  peril. 
Hence,  as  I  have  said,  anger  and  hatred  is  a  defense 
reaction. 

There  are  other  ways  in  which  the  Kaiser's  sub- 
conscious phobia  unconsciously  determines  his  men- 
tal behavior — by  this  I  mean  his  modes  or  reason- 
ing, his  political  principles  and  activities.  As  is  well 
recognized  not  only  by  psychologists  but  by  popu- 
lar notions,  such  a  repressed,  unadmitted  sentiment 
becomes  a  motivating  force,  a  subconscious  motive 
that  directs  our  conscious  reasonings. 

Thus  the  Kaiser  rationalizes,  as  psychologists  say, 
his  political  objections  to  democracy — that  is,  un- 
willing to  admit  his  real  objections,  he  finds  and 
formulates  logical  reasons  why  democracy  is  wrong 
and  why  his  own  opinions  are  right,  really  believing 
in  them,  perhaps,  as  God-given.  Saving  the  intro- 
duction of  the  Deity,  this  is  nothing  more  than  what 
every  one  does  who  is  unconsciously  influenced  by 
subconscious  motives  of  which  he  is  unaware. 

When  we  say  that  a  person  is  unconsciously  in- 
fluenced by  this  or  that,  unconsciously  governed 


172  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

by  a  prejudice  or  sentiment  like  jealousy  or  fear  or 
ambition  or  what  not,  we  mean  that  he  is  governed 
by  a  motive  which  is  subconscious,  which  he  will 
not  admit  to  himself,  and  of  which  he  is  therefore 
unaware.  It  determines  his  thoughts  just  as  the 
hidden  works  of  a  clock  determine  the  movements 
of  the  hands  and  chimes. 

THE  MORAL 

What  is  the  moral  of  all  this?  Surely  the  insight 
into  the  Kaiser's  mind  whioh  a  study  of  his  senti- 
ments and  his  phobia  has  given  us  reveals  some- 
thing more  important  than  the  mere  personality  of 
an  exalted  personage — exalted  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world.  It  gives  us  an  insight  into  the  political  forces 
which  are  wrestling  within  the  German  Empire  for 
those  ideals  for  which  humanity  has  been  striving 
through  all  the  ages.  It  reveals  the  forces  which 
for  years  have  been  striving  with  might  and  main 
to  suppress  these  ideals.  And  it  reveals  the  forces 
upon  which  the  world  must  depend  to  overthrow 
Germanism. 

The  Kaiser  and  his  House  of  HohenzoUern  and 
all  that  they  stand  for  have  become  Civilization's 
World-Problem. 

If  the  Powers  of  Europe  want  lasting  peace 
through  the  overthrow  of  autocracy  and  militarism, 
i.  e.,  Germanism,  the  obsession  of  the  Kaiser  points 
the  way — look  to  the  democracy  of  Germany ! 


THE    AMERICAN    VERSUS    THE    GER- 
MAN VIEWPOINT 


THE    AMERICAN    VERSUS    THE    GER- 
MAN VIEWPOINT* 


FRENCH   AND   GERMAN   LESSONS  AT   THE   FRONT 

SINCE  the  war  began  numerous  articles  by 
organized  German  propagandists  have  ap- 
peared scattered  through  the  press  and  mag- 
azines of  this  country,  and  in  pamphlets. 

These  articles  have  given  us  the  German  view- 
point of  government,  of  the  causes  of  and  respon- 
sibility for  the  war,  of  the  manner  in  which  war 
should  be  carried  on,  of  German  ideals  and  other 
matters. 

With  the  exception  possibly  of  Dr.  Dernburg, 
Dr.  von  Mach  stands  out  as  the  most  prolific  writer 
among  these  propagandists.  Furthermore,  a  few 
days  ago  he  presided  in  Washington  at  the  propa- 
gandist meeting  of  "German  Americans,"  which 
passed  resolutions  demanding  unneutral  action  by 
our  government. 

What,  then,  is  the  German  viewpoint? 

I  turn  to  Dr.  von  Mach  for  the  above  reasons 
and  because  he  has  instructed  us  in  a  long  series 
of  articles  specifically  entitled  the  ''German  View- 
point."  These  cover  about  every  aspect  of  German 

*  Printed  in  the  Boston  Sunday  Post,  February  7  and  14,  1915. 

175 


176  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

thought  and  activity.  With  only  one  of  these  view- 
points am  I  interested  here,  that  of  the  German 
army's  method  of  carrying  on  war.  I  will  cite  only 
so  much  as  will  enable  one  who  has  not  read  the 
original  article  to  understand  this  viewpoint. 

Dr.  von  Mach  begins  by  quoting  the  following 
words  of  the  great  von  Moltke,  written  in  1880: 

"Nobody,  I  think,  can  deny  that  the  general  soft- 
ening of  men's  manners  has  been  followed  by  a  more 
humane  way  of  waging  war.  The  introduction  in 
our  generation  of  universal  service  in  the  army  has 
marked  a  long  step  in  the  direction  of  the  desired 
aim,  for  it  has  brought  also  the  educated  classes  into 
the  army." 

"The  truth  of  this  statement,"  Dr.  von  Mach 
contends,  "is  fully  borne  out  by  the  reports  which 
have  reached  Germany  from  the  front." 

He  then  goes  on  to  illustrate  for  our  edification 
this  "viewpoint"  by  a  series  of  pictures  of  German 
army  life  constructed  to  show  "the  humaiie  way  of 
waging  war"  under  the  influence  of  the  educated 
classes  in  the  army. 

These  pictures  are  drawn  from  an  account  writ- 
ten by  Professor  von  Hartmann,  now  serving  as 
a  lieutenant  in  the  army.  The  first  picture  is  of  an 
incident  which,  we  were  told,  "may  well  form  the 
basis  on  which  to  construct  a  picture  of  the  German 
army  in  the  field  to-day."  It  is  called  a  "French 
Lesson  at  the  Front.  Place — A  Stubble  Field  in 
Belgium.    Time — Autumn,  1914." 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     177 

Songs  the  Germans  Sing 

The  soldiers,  halted  after  a  forced  march,  "are 
lounging  in  the  field,  talking  and  laughing"  in  an- 
imated groups.  Breakfast  finished,  they  "are  in 
excellent  humor."  Some  splendid  fellows  from  the 
country  have  lighted  their  pipes  and  we  hear  them 
"singing  the  beautiful  home  and  soldier  songs" 
which  we  are  told  (though  not  in  italics)  "often 
soften  for  the  time  being  even  the  hardest  hearts  of 
warriors" 

One  sample  of  these  beautiful,  softening  songs, 
expressive,  we  may  suppose,  of  German  sympathy 
for  the  enemy,  is  this : 

"France,  poor  France,  how  will  you  fare 
When  our  German  militaire 
Visits  you?     Colors:    Black  and  white  and  red. 
Poor  little  France,  it  is  too  bad!" 

Sympathetic  songs  like  these  are  heard  all  over 
the  field. 

Then  follows  the  French  lesson.  Here  we  see 
the  German  soldier  passing  his  leisure,  not  in  the 
rough,  uncouth  pastimes  proverbial  of  soldiers  of 
other  lands,  but  in  the  higher  intellectual  pastime 
of  acquiring  culture. 

On  an  order  from  the  commanding  officer  "at- 
tention" is  called,  and  the  whole  company  is  gath- 
ered about  the  professor-lieutenant  who  proceeds  to 
give  a  lesson  in  French  to  men  eager  for  "kultur" 
that  will  be  of  use  when  in  a  few  weeks  they  will  be 
in  Paris.    Then  the  army  takes  up  its  march  again. 


178  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Then  we  have  another  picture — that  of  the 
marching  soldiers,  with  softened  hearts,  singing  a 
touching  song  of  comradeship.  This  song  I  shall 
refer  to  later.    Once  more  the  picture  changes. 

"The  song  died  away,  the  thunder  of  the  cannon 
grew  louder;"  the  soldiers  are  going  into  battle. 
Now  we  have  a  picture  constructed  to  show  us 
the  religious  culture,  the  deep,  reverent  spirituality 
of  the  soldiers:  their  "grand  conception  of  God  and 
man;"  they  sing  Koerner's  "Prayer  During  Bat- 
tle," beginning  "Father,  I  call  to  Thee."  The  very 
air  seemed  purified. 

"Whatever  selfish  train  of  thought  the  individual 
soldier  or  ofiicer  had  been  following  fell  into  insig- 
nificance before  the  grand  conception  of  God  and 
man." 

An  American  Viewpoint 

Thus  we  see  in  a  succession  of  emotional  pictures 
how  von  Moltke's  dream — if  I  may  call  it  a  dream 
— has  come  true. 

These  are  delightful  idyls,  charming  pictures  of 
a  Christian  army,  of  an  "army  of  the  Lord,"  of 
the  softening  of  men's  manners,  and  of  the  humane 
German  way  of  waging  war.  It  is  the  German 
viewpoint.  But  there  is  an  American  viewpoint; 
let  us  contrast  them. 

Dr.  von  Mach  has  given  his  pictures  as  drawn 
by  an  eye  witness.  Professor  Hartmann,  a  German. 
Let  me,  too,  draw  some  pictures,  and  let  me,  too, 
take  my  pictures  from  an  eye  witness  in  Belgium ; 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     179 

but  he  shall  be  a  neutral  witness,  an  American,  Mr. 
E.  Alexander  Powell,  who  had  unusual  opportuni- 
ties to  observe  what  he  describes  in  his  book,  re- 
cently published,  "Fighting  in  Flanders."  He  was 
one  of  the  few  correspondents  on  the  firing  line.f 

If  any  one  has  not  read  that  book  let  him  do  so 
at  once  if  he  wants  to  realize  the  manner  of  the 
German  invasion  and  of  the  heroic  defense  of  their 
country  by  the  Belgians.  He  lets  you  understand, 
too,  how  war  is  actually  fought. 

I  cite  this  account  because  I  wish  to  disregard  all 
ex  parte  testimony.  All  the  Belgian  accounts  are 
those  of  interested  witnesses.  We  shall  see  the  war 
as  waged  in  Belgium  not  from  the  Belgian  or  the 
German  viewpoint,  but  from  the  American  view- 
point. 

Dr.  von  Mach's  first  picture  is  entitled: 

"A  French  Lesson  at  the  Front." 
Let  me  call  mine: 
"A  German  Lesson  at  the  Front." 
It  is  a  triptych  in  three  scenes: 

t  At  the  time  this  article  \vas  written,  February  1915,  we  did  not 
have  the  report  of  Lord  Bryce's  Commission  and  the  mass  of  inde- 
pendent testimony  to  German  atrocities  later  given  to  the  world  on 
the  evidence  of  eye-witnesses.  The  official  Belgian  statements  of  the 
time  were  ex  parte  but  they  have  been  fully  corroborated.  I  there- 
fore required  a  neutral  American  witness.  Mr.  Powell's  testimony 
has  since  been  supported  bj'  many  witnesses,  amongst  them  Mr.  Hugh 
Gibson,  whose  evidence  is  appended  as  footnotes  to  the  text  further  on. 


180  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

SCENE    I 

PLACE AERSCHOT      TIME AUGUST,   1914 

{To  understand  the  picture  we  must  remember  that  orders  had 
been  deliberately  given  to  burn  and  pillage  Aerschot  by  the  Germ,am 
com,mander  after  the  German  troops  had  entered  the  town.  This,  the 
commander  himself  told  Mr.  Powell,  was  in  retaliation  for  the  shoot- 
ing of  the  chief  of  staff  by  a  boy,  15  years  of  age,  the  son  of  the 
burgom,aster.  "What  followed,"  Mr.  Poioell  was  given  to  understand 
— the  execution  of  the  burgomaster,  his  son  and  several  score  of  the 
leading  townsmen,  the  giving  over  of  the  xoomen  to  a  lust-mad 
soldiery,  the  sacking  of  the  houses,  and  the  final  burning  of  the  town 
— "was  the  punishm,ent  which  would  always  be  meted  out  to  towns 
whose  inhabitants  attacked  Qerm,an  soldiers.") 

My  picture  is  of  what  Mr.  Powell  saw: 

In  many  parts  of  the  world  I  have  seen  many  terrible 
and  revolting  things,  but  nothing  so  ghastly,  so  horrify- 
ing as  Aerschot.  Quite  two-thirds  of  the  houses  had  been 
burned  and  showed  unmistakable  signs  of  having  been 
sacked  by  a  maddened  soldiery  before  they  were  burned. 

Everywhere  were  the  ghastly  evidences.  Doors  had 
been  smashed  in  with  rifle-butts  and  boot  heels ;  windows 
had  been  broken ;  pictures  had  been  torn  from  the  walls ; 
mattresses  had  been  ripped  open  with  bayonets  in  search 
of  valuables ;  drawers  had  been  emptied  upon  the  floors ; 
the  outer  walls  of  the  houses  were  spattered  with  blood  and 
pock-marked  with  bullets ;  the  sidewalks  were  slippery 
with  broken  bottles ;  the  streets  were  strewn  with  women's 
clothing. 

It  needed  no  one  to  tell  us  the  details  of  that  orgy  of 
blood  and  lust.  The  story  was  so  plainly  written  that 
any  one  could  read  it. 

For  a  mile  we  drove  the  car  slowly  between  the 
blackened  walls  of  fire-gutted  buildings.  This  was  no 
accidental  conflagration,  mind  you,  for  scattered  here 
and  there  were  houses  which  stood  undamaged,  and  in 
every  such  case  there  were  scrawled  with  chalk  upon  the 
doors,  'Good  People.     Do  not  burn.     Do  not  plunder,' 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     181 

The  Germans  went  about  the  work  of  house-burning 
as  systematically  as  they  did  everything  else.  They  had 
various  devices  for  starting  conflagrations — all  of  them 
effective. 

Despite  the  scowls  of  the  soldiers,  I  attempted  to  talk 
with  some  of  the  women  huddled  in  front  of  a  bakery 
waiting  for  a  distribution  of  bread,  but  the  poor  crea- 
tures were  too  terror-stricken  to  do  more  than  stare  at 
us  with  wide,  beseeching  eyes.  Those  eyes  will  always 
haunt  me. 

I  wonder  if  they  do  not  sometimes  haunt  the  Germans. 
But  a  little  episode  that  occurred  as  we  were  leaving  the 
city  did  more  than  anything  else  to  bring  home  the 
horror  of  it  all.  We  passed  a  little  girl  of  9  or  10  and 
I  stopped  the  car  to  ask  the  way.  Instantly  she  held 
both  hands  above  her  head  and  began  to  scream  for 
mercy.  When  we  had  given  her  some  chocolate  and 
money  and  had  assured  her  that  we  were  not  Germans, 
but  Americans  and  friends,  she  ran  like  a  frightened  deer. 
That  little  child,  with  her  fright-wide  eyes  and  her  hands 
raised  in  supplication,  was  in  herself  a  terrible  indictment 
of  the  Germans. 

Scores  Were  Shot  Down 

Do  you  like  the  picture.  Dr.  von  Mach?  Quite 
a  picture,  isn't  it?  Let  us  complete  it  in  order 
that  we  may  study  all  the  details  in  justice  to  Ger- 
man art. 

Piecing  together  the  stories  told  by  those  who  did  sur- 
vive that  night  of  horror,  we  know  that  scores  of  towns- 
people were  shot  down  in  cold  blood,  and  that,  when  the 
firing  squads  could  not  do  the  work  of  slaughter  fast 
enough,  the  victims  were  lined  up  and  a  machine  gun  was 
turned  upon  them. 

We  know  that  young  girls  were  dragged  from  their 
homes    and    stripped    naked    and    violated    by    soldiers — 


182  The  Creed  of  DeutscJitum 

many  soldiers — in  the  public  square  in  the  presence  of 
officers. 

We  know  that  both  men  and  women  were  unspeakably 
mutilated,  that  children  were  bayoneted,  that  dwellings 
were  ransacked  and  looted,  and  that  finally,  as  though  to 
destroy  the  evidences  of  their  horrid  work,  soldiers  went 
from  house  to  house  with  torches,  methodically  setting 
fire  to  them. 

Is  this  the  "humane  way  of  waging  war"  which 
the  great  Moltke  thought  had  followed  "the  general 
softening  of  men's  manners,"  and  the  bringing  of 
"the  educated  classes  into  the  army"  through  uni- 
versal service?  Wouldn't  he  be  proud  of  German 
"kultur"  if  he  were  alive  to-day? 

Perhaps  you  think  I  ought  to  give  the  reason 
why  the  15 -year-old  son  of  the  burgomaster  shot 
the  German  officer.    Well,  I  will. 

Shot  to  Defend  Sister 

The  Germans  claimed  it  was,  or  looked  like,  a 
prearranged  plan  on  the  part  of  the  townspeople, 
who,  it  is  asserted,  opened  fire  upon  the  troops. 
The  Belgians  give  another  reason  for  the  boy's  ac- 
tion. It  was  in  defense  of  his  sister's  honor.  You 
can  read  the  detailed  story  if  you  wish  to  know 
it,  in  Mr.  Powell's  book. 

I  do  not  know  if  that  story  is  true;  Mr.  Powell 
does  not  know.  But  there  must  have  been  some  rea- 
son, or  perhaps  the  boy  was  a  fanatic,  or  half-witted. 
Surely  no  sane  man,  and  surely  no  man  holding 
the  responsible  position  of  burgomaster,  would  give 
a  dinner  party  to  German  officers  and  arrange  to 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     183 

have  his  own  son  shoot  one  of  them,  knowing  that 
there  was  no  escape  from  the  consequences  of  such 
an  act  committed  in  his  own  home. 

But  accept  either  story  you  hke,  what  do  you 
think  of  a  commanding  officer,  of  the  mode  of  con- 
ducting war  that  executes  several  score  of  the  lead- 
ing townsmen,  that  shoots  down  women  and  chil- 
dren, that  gives  over  the  women  to  the  soldiery,  that 
orders  the  sacking  of  the  houses  and,  finally,  the 
burning  down  of  the  town,  house  by  house,  be- 
cause a  boy  shot  an  officer? 

Is  this  the  German  idea  of  a  "humane  way  of 
waging  war"? 

If  you  think  this  mode  quite  justified,  let  me  tell 
you  how  it  impressed  an  American,  one,  remember, 
accustomed  to  the  sights  of  war  in  many  lands: 

It  was  with  a  feeling  of  repulsion  amounting  almost  to 
nausea  that  we  left  what  had  once  been  Aerschot  be- 
hind us. 

But  the  Belgians  nevertheless  learned  their  Ger- 
man lesson  at  the  front. 

Here  is  the  second  panel  of  the  triptych.  Please 
look  at  it.  It  represents  a  second  "German  lesson 
at  the  front": 

SCENE   II 
PLACE LOUVAIN       TIME SAME 

The  Germans  had  entered  the  city.  The  inhab- 
itants had  evacuated  it  before  their  arrival.  Yet, 
in  spite  of  that  fact,  the  Germans  destroyed  it. 


184  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

They  used  a  motor  car,  equipped  with  a  large  tank 
for  petrol,  a  pump,  a  hose  and  a  spraying  nozzle.  The 
car  was  run  slowly  through  the  streets,  one  soldier  work- 
ing the  pump  and  another  spraying  the  fronts  of  the 
houses.  Then  they  set  fire  to  them.  Oh,  3'^es,  they  were 
very  methodical  about  it,  those  Germans.* 

*  Mr.  Hugh  Gibson,  Secretary  of  the  American  Legation  in  Brus- 
sels, has  recently  published  (Nov.  1917)  his  absorbingly  interesting 
"private  journal"  giving  his  observations  from  day  to  day  during 
those  savage  times  from  the  invasion  of.  Belgium  to  the  execution  of 
Miss  Cavelle  (Aug.  1915).  He  was  able  to  get  into  Louvain  during 
the  shooting-up  and  burning  of  the  city.  I  am  now  able  to  give 
further  "pictures"  of  Louvain  and  evidence  of  German  methods  from 
this  neutral  diary  of  an  eye-witness.     (I  quote  by  permission.) 

"We  ...  set  off  on  foot  down  the  Rue  de  la  Station,  .  .  .  The 
houses  on  both  sides  were  either  partially  destroyed  or  smouldering. 
Soldiers  were  systematically  removing  what  was  to  be  found  in  the 
way  of  valuables,  food,  and  wine,  and  then  setting  fire  to  the 
furniture  and  hangings.  It  was  all  most  businesslike.  The  houses 
are  substantial  stone  buildings,  and  fire  will  not  spread  from  one 
to  another.  Therefore  the  procedure  was  to  batter  down  the  door 
of  each  house,  clean  out  what  was  to  be  saved,  then  pile  furniture 
and  hangings  in  the  middle  of  the  room,  set  them  afire,  and  move 
on  to  the  next  house. 

"It  was  pretty  hot,  but  we  made  our  way  down  the  street,  show- 
ing our  passes  every  hundred  feet  or  so  to  soldiers  installed  in  com- 
fortable armchairs,  which  they  had  dragged  into  the  gutter  from 
looted  houses,  till  we  came  to  a  little  crossing  about  half  way  to 
the  Hotel  de  Ville.  Here  we  were  stopped  by  a  small  detachment 
of  soldiers,  who  told  us  that  we  could  go  no  farther;  that  they 
were  clearing  civilians  out  of  some  houses  a  little  farther  down 
the  street,  and  that  there  was  likely  to  be  firing  at  any  time. 

"The  officer  in  command  spoke  to  us  civilly  and  told  us  to  stick 
close  to  him  so  that  we  could  know  just  what  we  ought  to  do  at  any 
time.  He  was  in  charge  of  the  destruction  of  this  part  of  the  town 
and  had  things  moving  along  smartly.  His  men  were  firing  some 
houses  near  by  and  he  stood  outside  smoking  a  rank  cigar  and 
looking  on   gloomily.  ... 

"Machine  guns  were  at  work  near  by,  and  occasionally  there  was 
a  loud  explosion  when  the  destructive  work  was  helped  with  dyna- 
mite. 

"A  number  of  the  men  about  us  were  drunk  and  evidently  had 
been  in  that  state  for  some  time.    Our  ofBcer  complained  that  they 


Avierican  Versus  German  Viewpoint     185 

Wlmt  was  the  excuse  for  all  this?     I  wonder. 
That  is  not  as  pretty  a  picture  as  the  one  you 

had  had  very  httle  to  eat  for  several  days,  but  added  glumly  that 
there  was  plenty  to  drink.  .  .  . 

"He  (the  officer)  was  rabid  against  the  Belgians  and  had  an 
endless  series  of  stories  of  atrocities  they  had  committed — though  he 
admitted  that  he  had  none  of  them  at  first  hand.  He  took  it  as 
gospel,  however,  that  they  had  fired  upon  the  German  troops  in 
Louvain  and  laid  themselves  open  to  reprisals.  To  his  thinking 
there  is  nothing  bad  enough  for  them,  and  his  chief  satisfaction 
seemed  to  consist  in  repeating  to  us  over  and  over  that  he  was 
going  the  limit.  Orders  had  been  issued  to  raze  the  town — 'till  not 
one  stone  was  left  on  another,'  as  he  said. 

"Just  to  see  what  would  happen  I  inquired  about  the  provision  of 
The  Hague  Conventions,  prescribing  that  no  collective  penalty  can 
be  imposed  for  lawless  acts  of  individuals.  He  dismissed  that  to  his 
own  satisfaction  by  remarking  that: 

"  'All  Belgians  are  dogs,  and  all  would  do  these  things  unless 
they  are  taught  what  will  hajjpen  to  them.' 

"Convincing   logic ! 

"With  a  hard  glint  in  his  eye  he  told  us  the  purpose  of  his  work; 
he  came  back  to  it  over  and  over,  but  the  burden  of  what  he  had 
to  say  was  something  like  this: 

"  'We  shall  make  this  place  a  desert.  We  shall  wipe  it  out  so 
that  it  will  be  hard  to  find  where  Louvain  used  to  stand.  For 
generations  people  will  come  here  to  see  what  we  have  done,  and 
it  will  teach  them  to  respect  Germany  and  to  think  twice  before  they 
resist  her.  Not  one  stone  on  another,  I  tell  you — kein  Stein  auf 
einander !' 

"I  agreed  with  him  when  he  remarked  that  people  would  come 
here  for  generations  to  see  what  Germany  had  done — but  he  did 
not  seem  to  follow  my  line  of  thought.  .  .  . 

"We  went  on  into  the  freight  yards  and  were  greeted  by  a  num- 
ber of  officers  with  hopeful  talk  about  a  train  coming  from  Brus- 
sels with  food.  We  were  given  chairs  .  .  .  settled  down  and  lis- 
tened to  the  stories  of  the  past  few  days.  It  was  a  story  of  clear- 
ing out  civilians  from  a  large  part  of  the  town;  a  systematic  routing 
out  of  men  from  cellars  and  garrets,  wholesale  shootings,  the  gen- 
erous use  of  machine  guns,  and  the  free  application  of  the  torch — 
the  whole  story  enough  to  make  one  see  red.  And  for  our  guidancp 
it  was  impressed  on  us  that  this  would  make  people  respect  Ger- 
many and  think  twice  about  resisting  her."     Pp.  159-165. 


186  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

draw  of  the  happy,  animated  groups  of  German 
soldiers,  "lounging  oil  the  field,  laughing  and  talk- 
ing"; with  lighted  pipes,  "singing  the  beautiful 
home  and  soldier  songs  which  often  soften  for  the 
time  being,  even  the  hardest  hearts  of  warriors." 

But  would  you  like  an  idyl  of  that  kind?  Here 
is  one;  it  is  the  third  panel  of  our  triptych,  a  third 
German  lesson  at  the  front. 

SCENE    III 
PLACE TERMONDE     TIME SAME 

Our  American  had  made  his  way  with  difficulty 
from  Aerschot  to  Louvain. 

From  the  windows  of  the  plundered  and  fire-blackened 
houses  which  lined  the  road  from  Aerschot  to  Louvain, 
still  hung  white  flags  made  from  sheets  and  tablecloths 
and  pillowcases — pathetic  appeals  for  the  mercy  which 
was  not  granted. 

At  Louvain  we  came  upon  another  scene  of  destruction 
and  desolation.  Nearly  half  the  city  was  in  ashes.  Most 
of  the  principal  streets  were  impassable  from  fallen 
masonry.  The  splendid  avenue  and  boulevards  were  lined 
on  either  side  by  the  charred  skeletons  of  what  had  once 
been  handsome  buildings.  The  front  of  many  of  the 
houses  were  smeared  with  crimson  stains. 

Li  comparison  to  its  size,  the  Germans  had  wrought 
more  wide-spread  destruction  in  Louvain  than  did  the 
earthquake  and  fire  combined  in  San  Francisco. 

The  looting  had  evidently  been  unrestrained.  The  roads 
for  miles  in  either  direction  were  littered  with  furniture 
and  bedding  and  clothing.  Such  articles  as  the  soldiers 
could  not  carry  away  they  wantonly  destroyed.  Hang- 
ings had  been  torn  down,  pictures  on  the  walls  had  been 
smashed,  the  contents  of  drawers  and  trunks  had  been 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     187 

emptied  into  the  streets,  literally  everything  breakable 
had  been  broken.  This  is  not  from  hearsajs  remember ; 
I  saw  it  with  my  own  eyes.  And  the  amazing  feature  of 
it  all  was  that  among  the  Germans  there  seemed  to  be  no 
feeling  of  regret,  no  sense  of  shame.  Officers  in  immacu- 
late uniforms  strolled  about  among  the  ruins,  chatting 
and  laughing  and  smoKing. 

Attitude  of  German  Officers 

Mr.  Hugh  Gibson,  secretary  of  the  American  le- 
gation in  Brussels,  was  in  Louvain  on  the  second 
day  and  this  is  what  he  saw: 

....  The  Germans  had  dragged  chairs  and  a  dining 
table  from  a  nearby  house  into  the  middle  of  the  square  in 
front  of  the  station.  .  .  .  Some  officers,  already  consid- 
erably the  worse  for  drink,  insisted  that  the  three  diplo- 
matists join  them  in  a  bottle  of  wine.  And  this  while  the 
city  was  burning  and  rifles  were  cracking,  and  the  dead 
bodies  of  men  and  women  lay  sprawled  in  the  streets. 

Indeed,  their  "beautiful  home  and  soldier  songs" 
as  you  say,  had  softened  their  hearts,  but  the  scene 
is  a  different  one,  isn't  it? 

But  we  have  the  same  happy  soldiers  "lounging, 
talking  and  laughing,"  just  as  your  professor  de- 
scribes them,  and  smoking  and  drinking  (though 
it  is  beer  and  wine  instead  of  coffee)  and  "every- 
body is  elated,"  just  as  you  say. 

But  the  Belgian  townspeople,  what  of  them? 
Do  the  happy  soldiers  see  them?    I  don't  know. 

Louvain  was  not  destroyed  by  bombardment  or 
in  the  heat  of  battle.  The  Germans  had  entered  it 
unopposed  and  had  been  in  undisputed  possession 


188  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

for  several  days.  Why  did  they  burn  the  city  house 
by  house  and  shoot  down  the  townspeople,  men, 
women  and  children? 

As  with  Aerschot,  there  are  two  versions,  con- 
tradictory and  irreconcilable. 

The  Germans  say  that  in  accordance  with  a  con- 
spiracy they  were  attacked  by  the  townspeople; 
what  we  called  "sniping"  in  Vera  Cruz.  The 
townspeople  say  that  in  the  inky  blackness  of  night 
the  German  garrison,  mistaking  for  Belgians  a 
body  of  their  own  troops  retreating  and  falling  back 
upon  Louvain,  opened  fire  upon  them,  and  so  what 
approximates  a  massacre  of  civilians  followed,  and 
the  city  was  deliberately  burned. 

It  doesn't  matter.  Even  if  the  Germans  were 
attacked  (though  it  be  denied)  were  they  justified 
in  shooting  down,  indiscriminately,  civilians? 

Why  Was  Louvain  Burned? 

But  "why  did  you  burn  Louvain  at  all?"  That 
was  the  question  which  Mr.  Powell  asked  the  com- 
manding general,  von  Boehn. 

"  'Because,'  replied  the  general,  'the  townspeople 
fired  on  our  troops.  We  actually  found  machine 
guns  in  some  of  the  houses.  And,'  smashing  his 
fist  down  upon  the  table,  'whenever  civilians  fire 
upon  our  troops  we  will  teach  them  a  lasting  lesson. 
If  women  and  children  insist  on  getting  in  the  way 
of  bullets  so  much  the  worse  for  the  women  and 
children.'  " 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     189 

Yes,  as  General  von  Nieher  officially  notified  the 
citizens  of  Wavre,  "without  distinction  of  persons 
the  innocent  will  suffer  with  the  guilty,"  and,  as 
was  announced  by  proclamation  to  the  citizens  of 
Hazzelt  in  the  case  of  sniping,  "a  third  of  the  male 
population  will  be  shot." 

And  so,  as  Mr.  Powell,  in  another  place,  says, 
"the  citizens  had  attacked  them  and  they  would 
teach  the  citizens,  both  of  Louvain  and  of  other 
cities  which  they  might  enter,  a  lasting  lesson.  They 
did.  No  Belgian  will  ever  forget — or  forgive — 
that  lesson.  The  orgy  of  blood  and  destruction 
lasted  for  two  days." 

It  was  a  German  lesson  at  the  front,  a  lesson 
in  German  viewpoints.  Not  so  charming  as  the 
French  lesson  you  picture,  Dr.  von  Mach,  but  it 
was  better  taught  and  learned — taught  to  the  world, 
was  it  not?t 

t  "Many  subsequent  visits  to  Louvain,  and  conversations  with  people 
who  were  there  when  the  trouble  began,  have  only  served  to  strengthen 
the  impression  that  the  whole  affair  was  part  of  a  cold-blooded 
and  calculated  plan  to  terrorise  the  civilian  population. 

"While  we  were  there,  it  was  frankly  stated  that  the  town  was 
being  wiped  out;  that  its  destruction  was  being  carried  out  under 
definite  orders.  When  the  German  Government  realised  the  horror 
and  loathing  with  which  the  civilized  world  learned  of  the  fate  of 
Louvain,  the  orders  were  cancelled  and  the  story  sent  out  that  the 
German  forces  had  tried  to  prevent  the  destruction,  had  fought  the 
fire,  and  by  good  fortune  had  been  able  to  save  the  Hotel  de  Ville. 
Never  has  a  government  lied  more  brazenly.  When  we  arrived,  the 
destruction  of  the  town  was  being  carried  on  in  an  orderly  and 
systematic  waj^  that  showed  careful  preparation.  The  only  thing 
that  saved  the  Hotel  de  Ville  was  the  fact  that  the  German  troops 
had  not  progressed  that  far  with  their  work  when  the  orders  were 
countermanded  from  Berlin. 


190  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 


General  von  Boehn's  View 

The  interview  between  Mr.  Powell  and  General 
von  Boehn  is  destined  to  become  classic.  It  had 
been  sought  by  the  general,  who  had  expressed  a 
wish  to  have  an  opportunity  to  talk  with  Mr.  Pow- 
ell, to  give  him  the  German  version  of  the  treat- 
ment of  the  Belgian  civil  population  for  the  en- 
lightenment of  the  American  public.  Mr.  Powell 
was  accordingly  invited  to  dine  with  the  general. 
Here  is  more  of  the  conversation  as  given  by  the 
former  as  "nearly  verbatim"  as  he  could  remember 
it. 


"It  was  only  when  he  learned  how  civilization  regarded  his  crimes, 
that  the  Emperor's  heart  began  to  bleed. 

"The  true  facts  as  to  the  destruction  of  Louvain  will  startle  the 
world— hardened  though  it  has  become  to  surprise  at  German  crimes. 
Unfortunately,  however,  it  is  impossible  to  publish  the  details  at  this 
time  without  endangering  the  lives  of  people  still  in  Belgium  under 
German  domination.  But  these  people  will  speak  for  themselves 
when  the  Germans  have  been  driven  from  Belgian  soil,  and  they  are 
once  more  free  to  speak  the  truth."    Gibson's  Journal,  etc.,  pp.  171-2. 

"One  of  the  officers  I  saw  to-day  told  me  that  the  Germans  were 
deliberately  terrorizing  the  country  through  which  they  passed.  It 
is  a  perfectly  convincing  explanation  of  German  doings  in  this  coun- 
try, but  I  did  not  think  they  were  prepared  to  admit  it  so  frankly. 
This  frank  fellow  made  no  claim  that  civilians  had  attacked  the  Ger- 
man troops;  his  only  observation  was  that  they  might  do  so  unless 
they  were  so  completely  cowed  that  they  dared  not  raise  their  hands. 
He  emphasized  the  fact  that  it  was  not  done  as  a  result  of  bad 
temper,  but  as  part  of  the  scheme  of  things  in  general.  For  my 
information,  he  remarked  that  in  the  long  run  this  was  the  most 
humane  manner  of  conducting  war,  as  it  discouraged  people  from 
doing  things  that  would  bring  terrible  punishment  upon  them.  And 
yet  some  of  these  Belgians  are  ungrateful  enough  to  complain  at 
being  murdered  and  robbed."     Ibid.,  p.  190. 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     191 

"But  why  wreak  your  vengeance  on  women  and  chil- 
dren?" I  asked, 

"None  have  been  killed,"  the  general  asserted  positively. 

"I  am  sorry  to  contradict  you,  general,"  I  asserted,  with 
equal  positiveness,  "but  I  have  myself  seen  their  bodies. 
So  has  Mr.  Gibson,  the  secretary  of  the  American  lega- 
tion in  Brussels,  who  was  present  during  the  destruction 
of  Louvain." 

"Of  course,"  replied  General  von  Boehn,  "there  is  al- 
ways danger  of  women  and  children  being  killed  during 
street  fighting  if  they  insist  on  coming  into  the  streets. 
It  is  unfortvinatc,  but  it  is  war !" 

"But  how  about  a  woman's  body  I  saw  with  the  hands 
and  feet  cut  off?  How  about  the  white-haired  man  and 
his  son  whom  I  helped  to  bury  outside  of  Sempst  who  had 
been  killed  merely  because  a  retreating  Belgian  soldier 
had  shot  a  German  soldier  outside  their  house? 

"There  w^ere  22  bayonet  wounds  in  the  old  man's  face. 
I  counted  them.  How  about  the  little  girl,  two  years 
old,  who  was  shot  while  in  her  mother's  arms  by  an  Uhlan 
and  whose  funeral  I  attended  at  Heyst-op-den-Berg? 
How  about  the  old  man  near  Vilvorde  who  was  hung  by 
his  hands  from  the  rafters  of  his  house  and  roasted  to 
death  by  a  bonfire  being  built  under  him?" 

The  general  seemed  taken  aback  by  the  exactness  of  my 
information. 

"Such  things  arc  horrible  if  true,"  he  said.  "Of  course, 
our  soldiers,  like  soldiers  in  all  armies,  sometimes  get 
out  of  hand  and  do  things  which  we  would  never  tolerate 
if  we  knew  it.  At  Louvain,  for  example,  I  sentenced 
two  soldiers  to  12  years'  penal  servitude  each  for  assault- 
ing a  woman." 

"Apropos  of  Louvain,"  I  remarked,  "why  did  you  de- 
stroy the  library?" 

"We  regretted  that  as  much  as  any  one  else,"  was  the 
answer.  "It  caught  fire  from  burning  houses  and  we 
could  not  save  it." 

General  von  Boehn  is  as  good  as  a  guide  book  in  ex- 
plaining German  war  pictures,  is  he  not? 


192  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Richard  Harding  Davis'  Views 

I  have  refrained  from  quoting  the  Belgian  ac- 
count of  what  happened  because  it  is  ex  parte  tes- 
timony. But  another  American  eye  witness,  Rich- 
ard Harding  Davis,  writes : 

For  many  miles  we  saw  procession  after  procession  of 
peasants  fleeing  from  one  burning  village,  which  had  been 
their  home,  to  other  villages,  to  find  only  blackened  walls 
and  smouldering  ashes. 

"Fifty  Germans  were  killed  and  wounded,"  said  Gen- 
eral von  Ludwitz,  the  military  governor  of  Louvain,  "and 
for  that  Louvain  must  be  wiped  out — so !"  In  pantomime 
with  his  fist  he  swept  the  papers  across  the  table.  .  .  . 
Were  he  telling  us  his  soldiers  had  destroyed  a  kitchen 
garden  his  tone  could  not  have  expressed  less  regret. 
Davis  watched  the  scene  from  the  windows  of  the  train 
in  which  he  was  held  at  the  station.  The  Germans  that 
night  "crowded  the  windows  of  the  train,  boastful,  gloat- 
ing, eager  to  interpret." 

Outside  the  station  in  the  public  square  the  people  of 
Louvain  passed  in  an  unending  procession,  women  bare- 
headed, weeping,  men  carrying  the  children  asleep  on 
their  shoulders,  all  hemmed  in  by  the  shadowy  arm  of 
gray  wolves.  Once  they  were  halted,  and  among  them 
was  marched  a  line  of  men.  These  were  on  their  way  to  be 
shot.  And,  the  better  to  point  the  moral,  an  officer  halted 
both  processions  and,  climbing  to  a  cart,  explained  why 
the  men  were  to  die.  He  warned  others  not  to  bring  down 
upon  themselves  a  like  vengeance. 

As  those  being  led  to  spend  the  night  in  the  fields  looked 
across  to  those  marked  for  death  they  saw  old  friends, 
neighbors  of  long  standing,  men  of  their  own  household. 
The  officer  bellowing  at  them  from  the  car  was  illuminated 
by  the  headlights  of  an  automobile.  He  looked  like  an 
actor  held  in  a  spotlight  on  a  darkened  stage. 

At  Louvain  that  night  the  Germans  were  like  men  alter 
an  orgy. 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     193 

Awful  Price  Belgians  Paid 

If  the  Belgian  civilians  sniped  the  German  sol- 
diery the  latter  were  undoubtedly  justified  in  shoot- 
ing offenders  but,  Dr.  von  Mach,  do  you  think  they 
were  justified  in  shooting  the  citizens  indiscrim- 
inately, the  innocent  with  the  guilty? 

And,  if  you  do,  do  you  think  they  were  justified 
in  systematically  burning  and  pillaging  the  homes 
and  workshops  and  other  buildings  of  the  guilt- 
less? 

You  have  imagination;  think  what  that  means: 
the  poor  and  the  rich,  the  sick  and  the  well,  the 
old  and  the  young,  the  helpless  and  the  strong,  the 
bread  winners  and  their  dependents,  all  made  des- 
titute without  a  place  wherein  to  live  or  to  work, 
without  means  of  support,  the  innocent  and  the 
guilty,  thrown  helpless  upon  the  world  to  be  fed 
by  American  charity,  and  later — what?  And  all 
this  because,  if  you  believe  the  allegation,  some 
rash  hotheads  sniped  a  chivalrous,  humane  soldiery. 

In  every  large  city  there  are  hotheads  and  men- 
tal defectives  and  fanatics.  It  was  a  policy  of  ter- 
rorism and  intimidation.  Do  you  think  this  the 
only  policy  that  would  suffice  to  overcome  resistance 
to  the  conquerors?  Could  they  not,  for  instance, 
have  been  satisfied  with  temporarily  rounding  up 
the  inhabitants  in  concentration  camps  to  stop  snip- 
ing? 

We  Americans  did  not  sack  and  burn  Vera  Cruz, 
though  they  sniped  us.     No,  as  Mr.  Powell  says, 


19.4  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

"The  bombardment  of  cities,  the  destruction  of  his- 
toric monuments,  the  burning  of  villages  and,  in 
many  cases,  the  massacre  of  civilians  was  the  price 
which  the  Belgians  were  forced  to  pay  for  resisting 
the  invader." 

You  ask  us  to  imagine  (with  your  kindly  pro- 
fessor) the  "iron  line"  after  the  French  lesson  he 
describes,  again  on  the  march  and  singing  "Ich  hatt 
emen  Kameraden."  After  each  verse  rang  the  re- 
frain : 

"The  birds  in  the  woods  are  singing, 

Are  singing  to  warm  your  heart. 
At  home,  ah,  at  home,  your  dear  ones. 

We'll  meet  and  never  will  part. 
Gloria  !     Gloria  !     Victoria ! 

With  heart  and  hand  for  the  Fatherland ! 

Listen  once  more.  Do  you  hear  the  song  of 
those  same  humane  German  soldiers? 

Do  you  see  them  again  marching,  but  now  drunk 
with  the  orgies  of  sackings  and  burnings  and  kill- 
ings of  Aerschot,  of  Vise,  of  Tirlemont,  of  Liege,  of 
Termonde,  of  Malines,  of  Louvain  and  God  knows 
how  many  towns  and  villages  and  hamlets  ?  In  the 
glare  of  the  flames  you  see  them;  and  again  with 
light  hearts  they  sing: 

"The  birds  in  the  woods  are  singing, 
Are  singing  to  warm  your  heart. 

At  home,  ah,  at  home,  your  dear  ones. 
We'll  meet  and  never  will  part." 

It  is  the  same  refrain.  And  as  they  sing  you 
see,  too,  by  the  same  light  of  the  burning  towns 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     195 

and  villages,  the  long  lines  of  panic-stricken  Bel- 
gians fleeing  from  their  "homes,"  and  you  see,  near 
by,  the  condemned — ^husbands,  sons,  brothers,  "dear 
ones" — being  led  away  to  the  place  of  their  killing. 

Other  Pictures  Drawn 

There  are  other  pictures  of  other  scenes  which  I 
might  draw;  the  picture  of  the  people — innocent — 
non-combatants,  women  and  men — killed  in  their 
beds  in  Antwerp  by  bombs  thrown  by  a  Zeppelin 
in  the  attempt  to  assassinate  the  royal  family. 

This  picture,  one  that  Mr.  Powell  saw,  would 
include  among  the  killed  and  wounded  a  child  man- 
gled by  a  shell;  a  woman  leaning  out  of  her  win- 
dow, her  head  blown  off;  another  woman  blown  to 
fragments  splotching  the  floor,  the  walls,  the  ceil- 
ing with  .  .  .  and  then  fill  in  the  picture  with  tot- 
tering walls  and  skeletons  of  houses  wantonly 
blown  to  pieces.* 

*  Mr.  Hugh  Gibson  besides  being  in  Louvain  had  the  good  fortune 
to  be  in  Antwerp  the  night  of  the  Zeppelin  raid.  His  Journal  (above 
mentioned)  gives  a  detailed  description  from  his  own  observation  of 
the  destruction  and  murder  wrought.  From  it  I  take  the  following 
bits  to  substantiate  Mr.  Powell's  statements: 

"The  first  bomb  was  in  a  little  street  around  the  corner  from  the 
hotel,  and  had  fallen  into  a  narrow  four-story  house,  which  had 
been  blown  into  bits.  .  .  .  The  street  itself  was  filled  with  debris 
and  was  impassable.  From  this  place  we  went  to  the  other  points 
where  bombs  had  fallen.  As  we  afterwards  learned,  ten  people 
were  killed  outright;  a  number  have  since  died  of  their  injuries 
and  a  lot  more  are  injured,  and  some  of  these  may  die.  A  number 
of  houses  were  completely  wrecked  and  a  great  many  will  have  to 
be  torn  down.  Army  officers  were  amazed  at  the  terrific  force  of 
the  explosions.     The  last  bomb,  dropped   as   the   Zeppelin  passed 


196  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

I  pass  over  the  destruction  of  works  of  art  that 
never  can  be  replaced;  but  to  complete  Dr.  von 
Mach's  pictures  of  the  "German  viewpoint,"  let  me 
mention  only  one  of  the  many  he  has  omitted,  that 
of  Malines  Cathedral. 

over  our  heads,  fell  in  the  centre  of  a  large  square — la  Place  du 
Poids  Publique.  It  tore  a  hole  in  the  cobblestone  pavement,  some 
twenty  feet  square  and  four  or  five  feet  deep  .  .  .  many  of  the 
houses  were  expected  to  fall  at  any  time.  .  .  .  Another  bomb  fell 
not  far  from  the  houses  of  the  Consul  General  and  the  Vice  Consul 
General,  and  they  were  not  at  all  pleased.  .  .  . 

"The  line  of  march  [of  the  Zeppelin]  was  straight  across  the  town, 
on  a  line  from  the  General  Staff,  the  Palace  where  the  Queen  was 
staying  with  the  royal  children,  the  military  hospital  of  Ste.  Eliza- 
beth, filled  with  wounded,  the  Bourse,  and  some  other  buildings.  It 
looks  very  much  as  though  the  idea  had  been  to  drop  one  of 
the  bombs  on  the  Palace.  The  Palace  itself  was  missed  by  a  narrow 
margin,  but  large  j^ieces  of  the  bomb  were  picked  up  on  the  roof 
and  shown  me  later  in  the  day  by  Inglebleek,  the  King's  Secretary. 
The  room  at  the  General  Staff,  where  I  had  been  until  half  an 
hour  before  the  explosion,  was  a  pretty  ruin,  and  it  was  just  as 
well  for  us  that  we  left  when  we  did.  .  .  . 

"Inglebleek,  the  King's  Secretary  .  .  .  said  that  the  Queen  was 
anxious  I  should  see  what  had  been  done  by  the  bombs  of  the  night 
before.  He  wanted  me  to  go  right  into  the  houses  and  see  the 
horrid  details.  I  did  not  want  to  do  this,  but  there  was  no  getting 
out  of  it  under  the  circumstances. 

"We  drove  first  to  the  Place  du  Poids  Publique  and  went  into 
one  of  the  houses  which  had  been  partially  wrecked  by  one  of  the 
smaller  bombs.  Everything  in  the  place  had  been  left  as  it  was 
until  the  police  magistrate  could  make  his  examination  and  report. 
We  climbed  to  the  first  floor,  and  I  shall  never  forget  the  horrible 
sight  that  awaited  us.  A  poor  policeman  and  his  wife  had  been 
blown  to  fragments,  and  the  pieces  were  all  over  the  walls  and 
ceiling.  Blood  was  everywhere.  Other  details  are  too  terrible  even 
to  think  of.  I  could  not  stand  any  more  than  this  one  room.  There 
were  others  which  Inglebleek  wanted  to  show  me,  but  I  could  not 
think  of  it.  And  this  was  only  one  of  a  number  of  houses  where 
peaceful  men  and  women  had  been  so  brutally  killed  while  they 
slept."     Pp.  140-144. 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     197 

Picture  a  deserted  and  undefended  city,  "as  si- 
lent and  deserted  as  a  cemetery ;  not  a  human  being 
to  he  seen."  That  city,  Malines,  bombarded  by  the 
Germans,  although  not  a  Belgian  soldier  in  it. 

And  picture  a  splendid  cathedral  looming  high 
above  that  silent  city;  and  then  imagine  shells  de- 
liberately aimed  at  that  wonderful  cathedral  until 
it  was  little  more  than  a  heap  of  debris;  and  then, 
the  cathedral  destroyed,  imagine,  in  that  city  of  the 
dead,  shells  bursting  with  a  shattering  crash  in 
deserted  buildings,  the  whole  front  of  those  build- 
ings crashing  down  about  you  in  a  cascade  of  brick 
and  plaster!  That  was  what  Mr.  Powell  saw.  Is 
this  wanton  bombardment  of  a  deserted  city  and 
of  a  great  work  of  art,  a  cathedral  of  religion,  "the 
German  viewpoint"?  And  is  this  that  effect  of 
bringing  "the  educated  classes  into  the  army" — of 
German  kultur — for  which  the  great  von  Moltke 
hoped? 

Dr.  von  Mach  in  his  "German  viewpoint"  goes 
on  to  tell  of  the  German  soldiers  when  going  into 
battle  singing,  during  "the  thunder  of  the  cannon/' 
Koerner's  battle  hymn,  company  after  company 
joining  in  the  magnificent  song: 

"Father,  I  call  to  Thee. 
The  roaring  artillery's  clouds  thicken  round  ine, 
The  hiss  and  the  glare  of  the  loud  bolts  confound  me. 

Ruler  of  battles,  I  call  on  Thee; 

O  Father,  lead  Thou  me!" 

Shall  we  picture  the  soldiers  again  amidst  these 
"roaring  artillery's  clouds,"  "the  thunder  of  the  can- 


198  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

non;"  and  again  singing,  while  they  bombarded  the 
cathedral  dedicated  to  their  God,  "Father,  I  call 
to  Thee?"  and  did  "the  very  air  seem  purified"  "be- 
fore the  grand  conception  of  God  and  man"  ?  Per- 
haps, after  all,  it  is  only  a  matter  of  viewpoint. 

No,  Dr.  von  Mach,  you  and  your  fellow  propa- 
gandists, Dr.  Dernburg  and  Dr.  Miinsterberg,  Dr. 
Albert  and  others,  appeal  in  vain  to  the  American 
people.  You  do  not  know  the  true  full-blooded 
American  of  the  twentieth  century.  Americans  are 
governed  by  feelings  of  humanity,  of  pity,  of  mercy, 
of  fair  play. 

Those  are  the  ideals  of  our  national  conscience. 
Americans  believe  in  a  government  for  the  people 
and  by  the  people,  not  in  a  government  by  an  auto- 
cratic military  caste,  without  pity,  without  mercy, 
without  regard  for  the  rights  of  mankind. 

If  I  read  the  signs  of  public  opinion  aright,  if  I 
correctly  understand  American  ideals  of  human 
rights,  Germany  stands  condemned  by  American 
opinion.  America  cares  nothing  for  the  "necessi- 
ties of  war,"  whether  argued  as  an  excuse  for  crimes 
against  humanity  by  a  German  General  Staff  in 
1914,  or  a  "Spanish  Butcher"  in  Cuba  in  1898;  she 
cares  nothing  for  fine-spun  specious  arguments  as 
to  why  Germany  was  not  to  blame  for  the  invasion 
of  Belgium.  She  sees  only  a  peaceful,  unoffending 
nation  defending  her  inalienable  rights  to  her  own 
soil.  And  she  sees  the  inhabitants  for  this  offence 
shot  down,  and  their  houses,  one  by  one,  put  to 
the  torch ;  she  sees  tens  of  thousands  of  homes  deso- 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     199 

late,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  inhabitants  driv- 
en into  exile,  or  starving  and  dependent  upon 
American  charity — all  this,  mind  you,  not  as  a 
sporadic  instance  in  one  city,  but  repeatedly,  day 
by  day,  in  many  cities  and  towns;  and  not  as  un- 
avoidable accidents  from  the  shelling  of  the  enemy 
in  battle,  but  deliberately  and  systematically  and 
unnecessarily,  after  the  capture  and  occupation  of 
the  city,  for  the  sole  purpose  of  revenge,  to  over- 
come resistance  by  terrorism,  as  officially  proclaimed 
and  officially  justified.  It  is  for  these  reasons,  if 
for  no  others,  that  Germany  appeals  in  vain  to 
American  sympathy. 

The  German  Ideal  of  Government 

Before  closing  let  me  say  a  word  upon  one  of 
the  German  ideals  of  government.  This  ideal  is, 
the  responsibilities  of  government  should  he  under- 
taken for  the  people  by  the  state. 

The  "state"  stands  for  an  abstract  conception 
of  authority,  an  entity.  In  practice  it  is  an  auto- 
cratic caste,  at  the  head  of  which  is  the  Kaiser,  who, 
as  he  has  time  and  again  proclaimed,  rules  by  '*di- 
vine  right." 

"We,  the  Hohenzollerns,  regard  ourselves  as  ap- 
pointed by  God  to  govern  and  lead  the  people  whom 
it  is  given  us  to  rule,  for  their  well-being  and  ad- 
vancement of  their  national  and  intellectual  inter- 
ests," announced  the  Kaiser. 

And  again:  "Those  who  are  willing  to  help  me 


200  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

I  heartily  welcome  whoever  they  may  be;  those 
who  oppose  me  m  this  task  I  will  crush."  In  such 
a  state  we  have  the  embodiment  of  "efficiency" 
or  kultur. 

As  Professor  Francke  has  told  us,  the  German 
people,  in  every  class  (with  the  exception  of  the 
party  with  democratic  ideals)  consider  it  an  "obli- 
gation," a  duty,  to  subordinate  self,  all  individual 
interests,  all  individual  desires  and  welfare  to  this 
state. 

It  is  the  conception  of  "state"  and  citizenship," 
of  Plato  and  Socrates.  The  German  state  gov- 
erns for  the  people.  And  as  the  basis  of  efficiency 
is  power  to  impose,  the  army  and  militarism  become 
the  foundation  of  the  state,  and  the  autocratic  caste 
that  governs  in  the  name  of  the  state  becomes  a 
military  caste.  "We  belong  to  each  other.  I  and 
the  army.  Thus  we  are  born  for  one  another,  and 
thus  we  will  stand  together  in  an  indissoluble  bond 
in  peace  or  storm,  as  God  will  it,"  proclaimed  the 
Kaiser. 

The  authority  of  the  state  rests  on  the  Kaiser 
and  the  army,  not  on  the  will  of  the  people,  as  in  the 
American  republic,  England  and  France. 

From  the  American  viewpoint  we  are  forced, 
however  unwillingly,  to  the  conclusion  (in  consid- 
eration of  German  warfare  and  German  ideals  of 
government)  that  Germany  must  be  regarded  in 
mar  as  the  enemy  of  civilization,  and  in  peace  as 
the  enemy  of  democracy. 

Between  the  autocratic  German  viewpoint  and 


Arnericaii  Versus  German  Viewpoint     201 

the  democratic  American  viewpoint  there  is  an  ir- 
reconcilable conflict — a  conflict  of  ideals  that  can- 
not be  settled  by  argument,  by  citation  of  facts,  by 
appeals  to  logic  or  to  moral  judgment. 

It  can  only  be  settled  by  the  arbitrament  of  arms. 
If  the  allies  win,  we  may  expect  that  the  ideals  of 
the  democratic  viewpoint  will  receive  a  world-wide 
acceptance.  It  was  thus  that  the  conflict  between 
the  ideals  of  freedom  and  slavery  was  settled  in  this 
country  only  by  the  acceptance  of  the  arbitrament 
of  war. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  Germany  wins,  the  United 
States  of  America  still  remains  to  be  settled  with, 
and  that  conflict  of  viewpoints,  between  American 
democratic  ideals  and  German  autocratic  ideals, 
will  still  exist,  to  be  settled  some  day  in  the  future 
by  the  arbitrament  of  the  sword. 

II 

THE  GERMAN  POLICY  OF  TERRORISM 

In  my  first  article  I  contrasted  the  methods  of 
the  German  army  in  carrying  on  war  in  Belgium, 
as  seen  from  the  American  viewpoint,  and  as  seen 
from  the  German  viewpoint. 

And  I  pointed  out  why,  in  consequence  of  this 
difference  in  viewpoints,  Germany  had  lost  the  sym- 
pathy of  real  Americans. 


There  are  numerous  other  policies,  both  military 
and  political,  in  regard  to  which  the  two  viewpoints 


202  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

are  radically  antagonistic.  These  differences  have 
produced  that  irreconcilable  conflict  of  opinion  upon 
which  I  dwelt. 

Some  of  these  I  discuss  to-day ;  but  before  doing 
so  let  me  point  out  and  insist,  as  emphatically  as  I 
can,  that  it  was  not  the  German  soldier  that  was 
responsible  for  the  inhuman  atrocities  in  Belgium, 
and  the  laying  waste  of  the  cities  and  towns. 

The  soldier  must  obey.  The  responsibility  lies 
wholly  upon  the  men  "higher  up,"  upon  the  govern- 
ment which  ordered  the  policy  and  gave  the  com- 
mands.   The  German  soldier  is  not  to  be  blamed. 

That  it  was  the  government  policy  to  overcome 
resistance  of  the  civilian  population  by  a  policy  of 
terrorism — by  exacting  money  tribute  from  cap- 
tured cities,  by  taking  hostages  to  be  killed  in  case 
of  resistance  by  civilians,  by  shooting  a  large  num- 
ber of  unoffending  citizens  in  retaliation  for  offences 
committed  by  others,  and  to  deter  further  resistance 
by  burning  wholesale  the  houses  and  turning  out 
the  inhabitants  destitute,  and  by  many  other  ruth- 
less acts  that  were  a  revival  of  the  middle  ages — 
needs  no  argument. 

The  policy  was  publicly  announced  to  the  world 
through  proclamations  issued  by  such  commanding 
generals  as  von  Buelow,  von  Emmich,  von  Boehn, 
von  der  Goltz,  von  Nieher,  von  Luetwitz  and  Major 
Dieckmann. 

It  is  only  by  reading  these  proclamations  that 
we  can  fully  realize  this  policy,  a  relic  of  the  middle 
ages,  and  comprehend  the  viewpoint  from  which 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     203 

the  Germans  ordered  the  atrocities  committed.  For 
example,  the  following  were  issued: 

First,  two  general  proclamations  of  August  4 
and  August  9,  by  Generals  von  Emmich  and  von 
Buelow  respectively,  to  the  Belgian  nation,  an- 
nouncing the  German  policy  and  demanding  a  "free 
passage." 

That  in  the  absence  of  resistance  the  population 
would  be  treated  kindly,  but  that  "we  will  act  se- 
verely on  any  attempt  by  the  population  to  show 
resistance  to  the  German  troops  or  to  do  injury 
to  the  military  interests." 

That  "the  destruction  of  bridges,  tunnels  and 
railway  lines  will  be  regarded  as  hostile  acts." 

That  Belgians  "will  have  to  choose"  and 

That  "it  depends  on  your  wisdom  and  under- 
standing patriotism  to  avoid  for  your  country  the 
horrors  of  war." 

Proclamations  Threaten 

Accordingly,  on  August  17,  a  proclamation  from 
the  German  viewpoint  to  the  citizens  of  Hasselt  an- 
nounced: "In  the  case  of  civilians  shooting  on 
the  German  army,  a  third  of  the  male  population 
will  he  shot'' 

On  August  22,  a  proclamation  by  von  Buelow 
announced  to  citizens  at  Liege  that: 

"It  was  with  my  consent  that  the  general  had 
the  whole  place  (Andenne)  burnt  down  and  about 
100  people  shot,"  and  that  Liege  would  be  treated 


204  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

in  the  same  way  if  the  inhabitants  attacked  the 
German  troops. 

On  August  23,  a  proclamation  by  von  Buelow 
announced  to  the  citizens  of  Namur: 

1 — That  citizens  who  did  not  betray  the  presence 
of  Belgian  and  French  soldiers  would  be  "con- 
demned to  hard  labor  for  life,"  and  that  every  such 
soldier  found  would  "be  immediately  shot." 

2 — That  any  citizen  who  did  not  inform  the  au- 
thorities of  the  existence  of  any  arms,  powder  or 
dynamite  which  he  knew  of  would  be  shot. 

3 — That  10  hostages  would  be  taken  from  "each 
street,"  and  if  there  was  any  uprising  in  the  street 
the  corresponding  "10  hostages  will  be  shot." 

On  August  27,  a  proclamation  by  von  Nieher 
notified  the  citizens  of  Woevre  that  if  the  balance 
of  the  war  levy  of  $600,000  was  not  paid  on  Sep- 
tember 1,  "the  town  of  Woevre  will  be  set  on  fire 
and  destroyed,"  and  "without  distinction  of  per- 
sons, the  innocent  will  suffer  with  the  guilty." 

Some  50  houses  were  set  on  fire  and  hostages 
taken  in  reprisal  for  alleged  but  denied  sniping. 

On  September  8,  a  proclamation  by  Major 
Dieckmann  notified  the  citizens  of  Grivegnee,  of 
Beyne-Heusay,  Bois  le  Breux,  and  Fleron  of  a 
large  number  of  acts  and  failure  to  act  for  which 
the  penalty  was  death. 

Among  these  misdemeanors,  some  trivial,  a  fail- 
ure to  obey  the  order  "hands  up,"  and  failure  to 
inform  the  military  commandant  of  the  location  of 
"quantities  greater  than  100  litres  of  petroleum. 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     205 

benzine,  benzol,  or  any  similar  liquid,"  of  which  he 
had  knowledge.  (It  followed  that  if  an  employee 
did  not  inform  on  his  employer,  or  a  friend  upon 
a  friend,  he  incurred  death,  and  if  he  did,  his  em- 
ployer or  friend  incurred  death.) 

Persons  held  as  hostages,  when  their  relieving 
substitutes  did  not  present  themselves  within  24 
hours  of  the  appointed  time,  incurred  death,  and 
also  if  the  population  of  the  communes  did  not  re- 
main "quiet  in  any  circumstances." 

On  September  4,  a  proclamation  by  von  Boehn 
notified  the  inliabitants  of  Termonde  to  "hoist  the 
white  flag  immediately  and  to  cease  fighting.  If 
you  do  not  agree  to  this  summons  the  town  will 
be  razed  in  a  quarter  of  an  hour  by  a  very  heavy 
bombardment." 

On  October  5,  a  proclamation  by  von  der  Goltz 
announced : 

"In  future,  the  localities  nearest  to  the  place 
where  similar  acts  (destruction  of  a  railway  line 
and  telegraph  wires)  take  place  will  he  pumshed 
mthout  pity,  it  matters  little  whether  they  are  ac- 
complices or  not.  For  this  purpose  hostages  have 
been  taken  near  the  railway  lines  thus  menaced," 
etc. 

In  view  of  these  proclamations,  the  claim  of  the 
Belgians  that  when  German  troops  have  been  re- 
sisted at  the  entrances  of  a  village  with  shots  fired 
by  regular  Belgian  troops,  the  population  has  been 
held  responsible,  and  punished  by  executions,  fire 
and  pillage,  is  not  incredible.     One  instance,  at 


206  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

least,  is  vouched  for  by  Powell,  the  instance  he 
threw  up  at  General  von  Boehn  without  contra- 
diction. 

That  such  proclamations  were  not  mere  bluff, 
but  were  literally  carried  out,  the  facts  cited  by 
them  give  evidence.  The  world  knows  it,  too,  from 
the  ruins  of  cities  and  towns  just  as  it  knows  by 
the  debris  that  an  earthquake  destroyed  Italian 
cities. 

The  Evidence  of  German  Soldiers'  Diaries 

And  the  world  knows  it  from  the  accounts  writ- 
ten in  the  diaries  of  captured  German  soldiers,  even 
if  all  other  evidence  be  disbelieved. 

I  have  cited  the  evidence  of  Americans;  let  me 
cite  the  evidence  of  these  German  diaries  in  order 
that  the  German  propagandists  in  this  country  may 
understand  the  reasons  for  the  failure  of  their  ap- 
peal to  the  American  viewpoint.  It  will  be  seen 
that  the  German  method  of  warfare  is  not  confined 
to  Belgium,  but  is  carried  into  France. 

At  the  entrance  of  the  village  (near  Dinant)  were 
about  50  villagers  shot  for  having  treacherously  fired 
upon  our  troops  during  the  night.  Many  others  were 
shot  so  that  we  counted  over  200.  Women  and  children, 
with  lamps  in  their  hands,  had  to  witness  the  terrible 
sight.     We  ate  our  rice  among  the  corpses. 

{From   the   diary   of  Private  Philip   of  Kamenz,  Saxony,  First 
Battalion,  178th  Infantry.) 

Langevillier,  Aug.  22. 
Village  destroyed  by  the  Eleventh  Pioneer  Battalion; 
three  women  hanged  on  trees. 

{From  a  soldier's  diary.) 


A^tierican  Versus  German  Viewpomt     207 

Of  the  inhabitants,  300  were  shot.  Those  who  survived 
the  volley  were  requisitioned  as  grave  diggers.  The 
women  were  a  sight,  but  it  cannot  be  helped. 

(Pnvate  SchlmUer  of  the  Third  Battery  Fourth  Field  Artillery, 
of  the  Guard.) 

Cirey,  Aug.  24. 
In  the  night,  incredible  things  have  taken  place;  shops 
plundered,  money  stolen,  violences.   .   .   .   Simply  to  make 
your  hair  stand  on  end. 

(From  an  officer's  diary.) 

Dinant,  Aug.  25. 
The  Belgians,  at  Dinant  on  the  INIeuse,  fired  on  our 
regiment  from  inside  the  houses.  We  shot  every  one  we 
could  see,  or  we  threw  them  out  of  the  windows,  women 
as  well  as  men.  The  bodies  lay  three  feet  deep  in  the 
streets. 

(From  a  soldier's  diary.) 

Aug.  26. 
The  charming  village  of  the  Gue  d'Hossus  has,  appar- 
ently, though  innocent,  been  destroyed  by  fire.  It  seems 
that  a  cyclist  fell  down,  which  made  his  gun  go  off  itself. 
He  was  immediately  shot  at.  The  male  inhabitants  were 
simply  thrown  into  the  flames.  Let  us  hope  that  such 
horrors  will  not  take  place  again.  At  Leppes,  about  200 
men  were  shot.  There,  an  example  was  necessary;  it  was 
unavoidable  that  some  innocents  should  suffer;  but  a  proof 
of  all  suspicious  of  guilt  ought  to  be  required,  so  that 
such  an  indiscriminate  shooting  of  all  men  might  be  con- 
trolled. 

(Diary  of  an  officer  of  the   17Sth  Regiment  of  Infantry,  12th 
Saxony  Army  Corps.) 

Laval-Morancy,  Aug.   28. 
Apparently   a  day  of  rest.      Confiscation   of  all  pro- 
visions, bread,  jam,  wine,  cigars;  killed  geese,  chickens, 
etc.     Played  piano,  plundered  fast ! 

(Diary  of  a  soldier.) 

We  have  thus  destroyed  eight  houses  with  their  inhabi- 
tants.    In  one  house  only,  two  men  with  their  wives  and  a 


208  '  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

girl  of  eighteen  were  stabbed  with  bayonets.  I  might 
have  pitied  the  girl,  for  she  had  such  an  innocent  way  of 
looking  at  us,  but  it  was  impossible  to  do  anything 
against  the  infuriated  mob;  then,  indeed,  they  are  no 
longer   men,  but  brutes.      We   are   now   on   our  way  to 

Sedan. 

{Last  page  of  an  unknown  soldier's  notebook.) 

Rethel,  September  8. 
Unfortunately,  discipline  is  getting  looser  and  looser. 
Spirits,  wine  and  plunder  are  the  order  of  the  day. 

(From  an  officer's  notebook.) 

Sept.  8,  1914. 
Tuesday,  8-9-14. — Reveille  5  a.  m.  Very  violent  fight 
in  the  woods.  Artillery  brought  into  action.  Order  to 
shoot  down  all  Frenchmen,  the  wounded  excepted,  even 
if  they  offer  to  lay  down  their  arms,  because  the  French 
allowed  us  to  come  within  a  short  distance,  then  took  us 
by  surprise  with  intense  firing. 

{Last  page  from  a  killed  soldier's  notebook.) 


The  American  Way  by  Contrast 

It  has  been  claimed  by  the  apologists  for  Ger- 
many that  this  policy  of  terrorism  was  justifiable 
under  the  circimistances. 

That  is  a  matter  of  viewpoint. 

The  policy  is  justifiable  if  we  deny  all  humani- 
tarian notions  of  warfare  and  admit  the  German 
contention  that  under  circumstances,  the  circum- 
stances of  this  war,  everything  is  permissible. 

That  it  is  not  the  American  viewpoint,  was  shown 
by  our  attitude  towards  Spanish  rule  in  Cuba. 

We  Americans  went  to  war  with  Spain  and  drove 


I 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     209 

the  Spaniards  from  Cuba,  and  gave  back  the  island, 
after  conquering  it,  free  to  the  inhabitants. 

Why? 

Because  of  the  atrocities  committed  against  the 
non-combatant  inliabitants  in  pursuance  of  a  mil- 
itary policy  by  Spain,  without  pity,  without  mercy, 
and  without  regard  to  human  rights,  under  General 
Weyler. 

The  American  conscience  would  not  stand  for 
that. 

But  have  not  the  Germans  outdone  the  Span- 
iards? The  Spaniards  did  not  aim  at  a  policy  of 
terrorism  so  much  as  to  cut  off  the  source  of  re- 
bellion ;  they  did  not  burn  the  cities  and  towns.  Yet 
when  the  Spanish  viewpoint  of  war  was  shown  to 
the  American  people;  when  the  press  was  able  to 
bring  home  to  the  full  consciousness  of  the  Amer- 
ican people  the  cruelties  inflicted  by  the  "bloody 
Weyler,"  as  he  was  called,  on  the  inhabitants  of 
Cuba,  the  American  conscience  was  aroused  and  no 
"necessities  of  war"  were  accepted  as  an  excuse. 
There  arose  an  irrepressible  conflict  between  the 
American  viewpoint  and  the  Spanish  viewpoint. 

If  we  were  willing  to  take  up  arms  to  enforce 
this  American  humanitarian  viewpoint  upon  Spain, 
regardless  of  the  Spanish  necessities  of  war,  do  not 
Germany  and  her  organized  propagandists  appeal 
in  vain  to  the  American  people  to  morally  tolerate 
the  still  more  atrocious  German  methods  of  carry- 
ing on  this  war? 


210  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

War  as  Taught  by  the  German  War  Book 

That  it  is  the  German  contention  that  under  cir- 
cumstances nearly  everything  is  permissible  in  war 
is  shown  both  by  their  writings  and  acts. 

In  a  book  issued  by  the  general  staff  of  the  Ger- 
man army,  entitled  "Usages  of  War  on  Land," 
extracts  from  which  I  have  in  a  review  before  me, 
there  are  a  number  of  passages  teaching  this  doc- 
trine to  the  soldiers.    In  one  he  is  taught  that: 

A  war  conducted  with  energy  cannot  be  directed  merely 
against  the  combatants  of  the  enemy  state  and  the 
positions  they  occupy,  but  it  will  and  must  in  like  man- 
ner seek  to  destroy  the  total  intellectual  and  material 
resources  of  the  latter.  Humanitarian  claims,  such  as 
the  protection  of  men  and  their  goods,  can  only  be  taken 
into  consideration  in  so  far  as  the  nature  and  object  of 
the  war  permit. 

Was  it  from  this  viewpoint  that  the  splendid  ca- 
thedrals of  Rheims  and  Malines  and  other  great 
public  monuments  were  bombarded  and  shattered? 

In  another  passage  the  soldier  is  taught  to  guard 

himself  against  the  danger  of  "sentimentality  and 

flabby  emotion"  of  modern  thought: 

The  danger  can  only  be  met  by  a  thorough  study  of 
war  itself.  By  steeping  himself  m  military  history  an 
officer  will  be  able  to  guard  himself  against  excessive  hu- 
manitarian notions ;  it  will  teach  him  that  certain  severi- 
ties are  indispensable  to  war,  nay  more,  that  the  only  true 
humanity  very  often  lies  in  a  ruthless  application  of  them. 

Was  this  the  viewpoint  from  which,  as  described 
in  the  German  soldiers'  diaries,  they  threw  women 
as  well  as  men  out  of  the  windows  of  the  houses 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     211 

until  the  bodies  lay  piled  three  feet  in  the  street, 
cast  the  "male  inhabitants  into  the  flames,"  stabbed 
the  women  in  the  homes  with  bayonets  or  hung  them 
to  the  trees,  shot  down  Frenchmen  who  offered  to 
"lay  down  their  arms" — acts  that  made  even  the 
hair  of  the  German  soldier  "stand  on  end"? 

And  was  it  with  this  passage  from  the  text-book 
in  mind  that  the  Kaiser  in  1900  instructed  his  troops 
embarking  for  China  in  the  following  words: 

When  you  come  into  touch  with  the  enemy,  give  no 
quarter,  make  no  prisoners.  A  thousand  years  ago  the 
Huns,  under  their  King,  Attila,  made  themselves  a  name 
which  still  lives  in  tradition.  Do  you  likewise  strike  home, 
so  that  for  a  thousand  years  to  come  no  Chinaman  may 
ever  again  dare  to  look  askance  at  a  German. 

On  the  other  hand,  certain  acts,  such  as  looting 
of  private  property,  are  forbidden,  but  little  atten- 
tion seems  to  have  been  paid  to  such  prohibitions 
in  this  war. 

It  must  be  from  the  German  viewpoint,  as  taught 
in  this  official  text-book,  that  Admiral  Schliepe,  in 
the  Lokal  Anzeiger  (as  cited  by  the  New  York 
Times),  complained  bitterly  that  Germans  in  their 
conduct  of  war,  and  especially  in  this  war,  have 
been  far  too  considerate! 

The  purely  human  side  of  war  receives  too  much 
attention ! 

England  is  choking  Germany,  and  under  the  cir- 
sumstances  everything  is  permissible !  England  may 
throw  up  her  hands  and  exclaim,  "Oh,  those  Ger- 
man barbarians!"     The  British  may  accuse  Ger- 


212  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

mans  of  being  invaders  also,  but  these  names  must 
be  borne.  And  other  German  authorities  high  up, 
even  Admiral  von  Tirpitz,  the  naval  secretary  of 
state,  have  given  voice  to  the  same  sentiments. 

And  so,  from  this  viewpoint,  Germany,  according 
to  the  press  despatches,  goes  into  a  wild  ecstasy  of 
enthusiasm  because  her  fleet  bombards  the  English 
towns  of  Scarborough,  Whitby  and  Hartlepool, 
two  of  these  unfortified  pleasure  resorts  like  Atlan- 
tic City  and  Bar  Harbor  and  Beverly,  and  knocks 
hotels  and  dwelling  houses  to  pieces  and  kills  non- 
combatants,  men  and  women — servant  girls  and 
babies  in  arms,  and  then  proudly  sails  safely  home. 
Under  the  circumstances,  as  they  say,  everything  is 
permissible. 

And  from  this  viewpoint  it  must  be  that  German 
aeroplanes  dropped  bombs  upon  English  towns,  rip- 
ping to  pieces  the  houses  of  non-combatants  and 
killing  men,  women  and  children ;  and  by  the  same 
policy  bombs  have  been  dropped  in  Paris  and  Ant- 
werp and  Warsaw  and  numerous  undefended  places 
with  intent  to  kill,  or  perfect  indifference  as  to 
whether  non-combatants  were  killed  or  not. 

It  was  according  to  this  viewpoint  that  Germany 
sowed  the  North  Sea  with  mines  and  blew  up  harm- 
less fishing  and  other  vessels. 

The  Policy  of  Destroying  Merchantmen 

And  now  comes  the  announcement  by  the  Ger- 
man Government  that  it  w^ll  blow  up  and  sink,  if  it 


Ainerican  Versus  Gentian  Viewpoint     213 

can,  by  submarines,  British  merchantmen  with  their 
crews  and  passengers,  though  the  latter  be  Ameri- 
cans and  other  neutrals;  and  this  notwithstanding 
the  laws  of  war  require  that  crews  and  passengers 
shall  first  be  removed  in  safety  before  the  ship  is 
destroyed. 

And  if  by  chance,  owing  to  the  use  of  a  neutral 
flag  by  English  merchantmen  to  escape  (a  practice 
common  in  all  wars,  by  all  nations)  an  American 
ship  is  mistaken  for  an  English  one  and  blown  up 
with  its  crews  and  passengers — so  much  the  worse 
for  the  American  ship. 

The  established  rule  that  the  ship  shall  be  first 
searched  to  determine  its  nationality  is  to  have  no 
binding  force  on  a  German  submarine.  The  avowed 
policy  is  to  attack  the  non-combatant  British  mer- 
chant marine  by  submarines,  and  as  submarines 
cannot  take  off  crews  and  passengers,  the  human 
freight  will  have  to  go  down  with  the  ship.  And 
this  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  transatlantic 
liners  carry  for  the  most  part  American  passengers. 

Are  we  to  have  another  Titanic  disaster?  That 
would  have  happened  if  the  Lusitania  had  been 
sunk  by  a  submarine. 

Then  as  to  the  flag.  German  warships  are  to 
have  a  right  to  use  a  neutral  flag  to  deceive  and 
capture  merchantmen  as  did  the  Emden  and  other 
cruisers,  but  the  use  of  a  neutral  flag  by  merchant- 
men to  escape  capture  or  being  blown  up  must  be 
protested ! 

And  as  our  ships  cannot  always  be  distinguished 


214  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

by  the  flag  or  at  sight  without  being  boarded  and 
searched,  they  run  the  risk.  This  is  the  meaning  of 
the  new  German  proclamation. 

I  pass  over  the  immediate  responsibility  of  Ger- 
many's political  and  diplomatic  activities  for  the 
war — ^lier  secret  agreement  with  Austria,  kept  from 
the  powers  during  all  the  preliminary  negotiations ; 
her  secretly  backing  Austria  while  claiming  to  be 
working  for  peace;  her  refusal  to  join  a  conference 
of  four  powers  to  act  as  mediators;  her  refusal  to 
give  the  same  promise  that  France  did  to  respect 
the  neutrality  of  Belgium;  her  plans  for  the  inva- 
sion of  France  through  Belgium,  long  in  advance, 
by  the  construction  on  the  Belgian  frontier  of  a 
system  of  strategic  military  railroads  of  little  com- 
mercial use ;  her  refusal  to  accept  any  of  the  several 
modes  of  mediation  acceded  to  by  Russia;  her  sup- 
pression of  the  offer  of  Russia  (now  just  come  to 
light )  to  leave  the  dispute  to  The  Hague ;  her  dec- 
laration of  war,  although  she  knew  Russia  and 
Austria  had  actually  agreed  upon  a  basis  of  medi- 
ation by  which  peace  might  well  have  been  pre- 
served. 

All  this  is  too  large  a  subject  for  discussion  here, 
but  may  be  read  in  the  official  publications  of  the 
despatches  of  the  great  powers. 

The  Prostitution  of  Intellectual  Honesty 

And  now,  in  closing,  one  word  regarding  the  so- 
called  "Intellectuals":     Are  we  not  compelled  to 


American  Versus  German  Viewpoint     215 

believe  it  is  owing  to  the  unconscious  influence  of 
the  German  viewpoint  that  a  large  number  of  Ger- 
man university  professors  and  others  distinguished 
in  literature,  science  and  learning,  men  of  great  per- 
sonal probity  and  culture  and  hitherto  commanding 
the  respect  of  the  intellectual  world,  have,  in  their 
aim  to  tell  us  "The  Truth  about  Germany"  in  that 
and  other  publications,  sacrificed  their  intellectual 
honesty  to  the  cause  of  the  fatherland. 

Are  we  not  compelled  to  believe  that  it  is  from 
the  German  viewpoint  that  these  intellectuals  and, 
still  more  flagrantly,  the  organized  political  propa- 
gandists in  this  country,  represented  in  the  press  by 
Dr.  Dernburg,  Dr.  von  INIach,  Dr.  Albert,  Dr. 
Miinsterburg  and  Mr.  Ritter,  all  of  whom  we  are 
glad  to  respect  for  their  culture  in  other  fields,  have 
misrepresented  facts  of  common  knowledge  relat- 
ing to  the  causes  of  and  responsibility  for  this  war 
— have  perverted  the  meaning  of  official  dispatches 
and  actions  and  motives  of  the  governments  of  Eng- 
land and  France  and  Belgium  and  Italy  and  Rus- 
sia, and  have  sought,  by  the  shallowest  sophistries, 
to  throw  dust  in  the  eyes  of  the  public  and  gain  the 
sympathy  of  the  American  people  ? 

If  one  wishes  to  recall  to  mind  examples,  one 
need  only  think  of  the  audacious  assertion  of  the 
propagandists  that  Germany  offered  to  make  a  new 
treaty  with  England  to  guarantee  the  neutrality  of 
Belgium  and  that  England  refused — a  reckless  as- 
sertion without  a  single  scrap  of  authoritative  evi- 
dence; the  sophistical  assertion  that  England  and 


216  The  Creed  of  Deutsclitum 

France  had  already  violated  the  neutrality  of  Bel- 
gium before  Germany  did;  that  England  and 
France  intended  to  invade  Belgium,  thus  forcing 
Germany  to  do  so ;  the  disingenuous  argument  and 
misrepresentation  that  Belgium  had  forfeited  its 
own  neutrality  before  the  war;  that  England 
claimed  to  declare  war  solely  because  of  her  treaty 
with  Belgium  without  regard  to  her  obligations  to 
France;  that  England  wished  for  war  and  did  not 
try  to  prevent  it ;  the  disingenuous  claim  that  Ger- 
many strove  to  hold  back  Austria  and  maintain 
peace,  and  many  other  statements  similar  in  kind. 

By  their  publications  the  propagandists  have  been 
successful  to  a  certain  psychological  and  political 
extent;  to  a  psychological  extent  in  that  they  have 
undoubtedly  presented  to  those  who  were  already 
national  sympathizers  with  the  fatherland,  to  those 
who  have  the  will  to  believe,  a  point  of  view  by  which 
they  can  justify  to  themselves,  in  spite  of  the  facts, 
their  belief  in  the  justice  of  Germany's  cause;  to 
a  political  extent  in  that  they  have  produced  a  soli- 
darity among  those  who  have  the  will  to  believe. 

But  to  neutral  Americans,  the  publicists,  the  dip- 
lomats, the  historians,  the  jurists,  the  men  of  Amer- 
ican universities,  and  the  "man-in-the-street,"  who 
without  previous  affiliations  and  without  previous 
national  prejudices  have  studied  for  themselves  the 
facts  as  revealed  in  the  official  publications  of  the 
belligerent  nations,  all  this  prostitution  of  intellec- 
tual honesty  must  be  destined  to  be  useless. 


THE  AMERICAN  CONSCIENCE 
1914-15 


(It  is  difficult  at  this  date,  1917,  when  we  are  actually 
at  war  with  Germany  and  stirred  to  the  depths  of  our 
being  by  the  great  issues  at  stake,  to  go  back  in  thought 
to  those  pre-war  days  of  1914  and  1915,  when  we  were 
still  neutral  and  passive.  It  is  almost  impossible  to  put 
ourselves  into  the  attitude  of  mind  of  those  days  previous 
to  the  sinking  of  the  Lusitania,  to  fully  realize  and  feel 
the  atmosphere  of  doubt,  hesitation  and  timidity  as  to 
what  course  we  should  pursue,  how  far  we  should  go  in 
the  maintenance  of  American  rights  and  American  honor, 
and  in  what  manner  and  degree  we  should  express  our 
sympathy  with  the  allied  nations.  Although,  as  I  be- 
lieve, the  great  majority  of  native  born  Americans,  not 
of  German  descent,  particularly  those  who  had  studied 
the  issues  of  the  war,  were  intensely  sympathetic  with  the 
cause  of  the  Allies,  who  they  believed  were  fighting  the 
battles  of  humanity  and  civilization,  there  was  still  con- 
siderable hesitation  on  the  part  of  a  good  many  to  give 
public  expression  to  this  sentiment,  and  many  more 
doubted  whether  our  Government  should  take  positive 
action  in  defense  of  American  rights.  Immediately  after 
the  sinking  of  the  Lusitania  opinion  in  favor  of  action 
was  general,  but  even  this  became  to  a  degree  quiescent  as 
the  days  of  diplomatic  note  writing  dragged  on  and  noth- 
ing was  done.  But  finally,  when  Germany  decreed  ruth- 
less submarine  warfare  to  begin  February  1,  1917,  on 
friend  and  foe  alike,  all  doubt  and  hesitation  disappeared. 
The  American  conscience  awoke  and  the  nation  found 
itself  at  last.  The  issues  raised  in  this  essay,  therefore, 
are  now  dead.  Nevertheless  it  is  not  well  to  neglect  en- 
tirely the  lessons  of  the  past  which  may  usefully  serve  the 
future,  and  it  does  no  harm  to  record  them  from  time  to 
time  lest  we  forget.  And  so  I  venture  to  include  this 
and  the  following  essay  (The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal) 
in  this  collection  though  the  issues  they  touched  fortu- 
nately, though  tardily,  proved  to  be  ephemeral.) 


THE  AMERICAN  CONSCIENCE,  1914-15  * 

DOES  silence  give  consent? 
Germany  broke  the  moral  and  inter- 
national law  of  nations  and  invaded  a 
neutral  state — Belgium.    The  American 
answer  was  silence. 

Germany  broke  the  moral  and  international  law 
of  nations  and  committed  wholesale  atrocities,  as 
a  policy  of  terrorism,  upon  a  Belgian  civil  popula- 
tion.   The  American  answer  was  silence. 

Germany  broke  the  moral  and  international  law 
of  nations  and  ruthlessly,  as  a  policy  of  terrorism, 
destroyed  and  carried  off  private  property.  The 
American  answer  was  silence. 

Germany  broke  the  moral  and  international  law 
of  nations  and  laid  tribute  of  millions  of  dollars 
upon  a  defenceless  population.  The  American  an- 
swer was  silence. 

Germany  broke  at  least  the  moral  law  of  human- 
ity and  appropriated  for  its  own  armies  the  food  of 
a  whole  nation,  leaving  the  inhabitants  to  starve 
or  to  be  fed  by  America.  The  American  answer 
was  silence. 

Germany  broke  the  moral  and  international  law 
of  nations  and  bombarded  with  its  warships,  and 
dropped  bombs  from  aeroplanes  upon  unfortified 

*  Printed  in  part  in  The  Boston  Herald,  April  3,  1915. 

219 


220  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

cities  and  towns,  killing  non-combatants,  men, 
women  and  children.  The  American  answer  was  si- 
lence. 

Germany  broke  the  moral  and  international  law 
of  nations  and  sowed  the  high  seas  with  floating 
and  other  mines,  destroying  neutral  ships.  The 
American  answer  was  silence. 

Germany  now  breaks  the  moral  and  international 
law  of  nations  and  destroys,  by  submarines,  the  mer- 
chantmen of  the  enemy  without  first  rescuing  the 
passengers  and  crew,  but  sinking  them  with  the  ships 
— if  they  cannot  save  themselves.  The  American 
answer  thus  far  has  been  silence.  Now  Germany 
has  torpedoed  and  sunk  an  American  passenger 
steamship,  the  Falaha,  drowning  112  of  her  pas- 
sengers and  crew,  and  has  similarly  destroyed  the 
steamer  Aguila,  with  an  estimated  loss  of  nine  lives. 
In  the  case  of  the  Falaba  the  submarine  made  no 
attempt  to  help  the  drowning  passengers,  and  it  is 
believed  that  some  persons  were  killed  by  the  ex- 
plosion of  the  torpedo,  so  little  time  was  given  them 
to  save  themselves.  In  the  case  of  the  Agidla, 
it  is  reported  that  the  submarine  opened  fire  with 
her  guns,  killing  a  woman  passenger,  the  chief  en- 
gineer and  two  of  her  crew.  There  is  reason  to 
believe  an  American  lost  his  life  on  the  Falaba, 
Every  day  brings  us  news  of  a  new  barbarity. 

How  long,  we  may  ask  with  all  due  regard  to  con- 
servatism, is  this  kind  of  warfare  to  go  on  without 
awakening  a  response  from  the  American  con- 
science?   I  do  not  mean  from  our  government  at 


The  American  Conscience,  1914--15       221 

Washington.  It  has  akeady  committed  itself  to 
silence  and  will  do  nothing;  it  is  too  late  to  act, 
though  very  likely  it  will  demand  a  money  indem- 
nity for  the  loss  of  an  American  life,  if  that  has  oc- 
curred. I  mean  a  public  remonstrance  from  the 
sentiment  of  the  communities  in  which  we  live,  let 
them  express  it  by  any  means  and  in  any  form  they 
will.  It  is  not  too  late  for  the  American  people  to 
express  their  sentiments  by  public  meetings,  peti- 
tions, resolutions  of  public  bodies  and  organizations, 
State  Legislatures  and  other  ways. 

Some  of  my  friends  of  a  conservative,  cautious 
attitude  of  mind  reply  in  answer  to  this,  "What 
good  will  it  do  to  protest?"  To  this,  those  who  do 
not  look  at  all  national  questions  from  only  a  ma- 
terial point  of  view  reply,  "A  good  deal  of  good 
that  cannot  be  measured  in  materialistic  terms  or 
in  terms  of  the  present."  Let  me  endeavor  to  jus- 
tify this  answer. 

This  is  plainly  not  a  matter  involving  the  ques- 
tion of  neutrality.  But  it  is  one  that  does  involve 
the  assertion  of  American  ideals  of  humanity  and 
of  the  national  conscience.  It  is  one,  I  believe,  that, 
so  far  as  we  fail  to  stand  up  manfully  for  those 
ideals  and  follow  the  impulses  of  our  conscience, 
involves  the  loss  of  our  national  self-respect  and  of 
national  honor.  It  is  one  of  moral  duty  and  self- 
respect. 

There  are  a  large  number  of  Americans,  the  great 
majority  as  I  believe,  who  hold  that  by  not  pro- 
testing against  the  "scrap  of  paper"  doctrine  and 


222  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

the  invasion  of  Belgium  and  all  the  barbarities  that 
have  been  practised  against  that  brave  little  nation, 
the  United  States  lost  the  great  opportunity  that 
was  hers  of  taking  a  position  in  this  world  as  a  great 
moral  force — a  position  rightly  due  her.  If  the 
United  States  had  done  that,  she  would  have  been 
not  only  such  a  moral  force  in  this  war,  but,  in  time 
to  come,  after  peace  has  been  restored,  having  shown 
the  courage  of  her  convictions,  she  would,  by  force 
of  character,  be  recognized  in  the  council  of  nations 
as  a  dominant  factor  in  determining  the  general  ac- 
ceptance of  and  submission  to  international  laws 
that  in  the  future  will  limit  the  barbarities  of  war, 
and  perhaps  even  secure  an  international  court  with 
power  to  prevent  them. 

To  the  opportunist  who  asks,  "What  good  will  it 
do?"  we  may  ask  in  turn,  "What  harm  will  it  do?" 
The  answers  usually  given  are  two: 

First,  we  should  gain  the  enmity  of  Germany. 

But  suppose  we  should — what  of  it?  Are  we  to 
refrain  from  asserting  in  the  face  of  the  world,  if 
need  be,  what  we  believe  to  be  morally  right  in  fear 
that  we  should  become  ill-favored  in  the  eyes  of  a 
nation  whose  policy  of  barbarity  has  shocked  the 
world?  Besides,  all  the  signs  of  the  times  go  to 
show  that  we  are  fast  becoming  the  object  of  ha- 
tred of  that  nation,  because,  in  addition  to  our 
known  sympathy  with  her  enemies,  we  refuse  to  be 
unneutral  and  stop  selling  munitions  of  war  to  any 
nation  that  commands  the  seas.  So,  looking  at  it 
in  a  purely  practical,  hard-headed  way — if  that  is 


The  Arfierican  Conscience,  1914-15       223 

what  is  wanted — we  shall  gain  Germany's  ill-will 
anyway. 

Count  Apponyi,  in  reply  to  the  argument  that  all 
the  parties  to  this  war  were  awaiting  the  judgment 
of  America,  has  already  written  voicing  the  senti- 
ment of  Austria-Hungary:  "Well,  that  was  so,  but, 
as  far  as  we  are  concerned,  it  is  no  more." 

The  second  and  most  common  answer  is  that  we 
hope,  if  we  keep  silent — though  we  may  venture 
to  appoint  a  day  to  pray  for  peace  in  our  churches 
— when  the  time  comes  for  peace  the  United  States 
will  be  able  to  play  the  part  of  a  friendly  mediator. 

Even  if  this  hope  be  fulfilled,  will  the  gain  to  the 
world  make  up  for  what  has  been  lost?  And  even 
if  Germany  by  that  time  shall  have  retained  any 
friendly  feeling  for  us  and  be  willing  to  accept  us 
as  an  arbitrator,  what  will  the  Allies  say  to  us?  Is 
it  not  reasonable  that  they  will  say,  could  they  be 
blamed  for  saying:  "Go  to!  What  have  you  to 
say  to  what  terms  we  shall  impose, — you  who  stood 
by,  in  dumb  silence,  you  who  saw  violated  every 
moral  law  of  nations,  every  law  of  humanity  vio- 
lated, every  human  right  for  which  Democracy 
stands — for  which  you  claim  to  stand — and  had  not 
a  word  to  say  of  protest.  Go  to !  What  have  you 
to  say  to  terms  of  peace!"  And  would  not  the  Al- 
lies be  right? 

Whether  a  protest  of  the  nation  would  have  af- 
fected Germany's  policy  of  terrorism  in  carrying 
on  this  war  and  changed  her  methods,  no  one  can 
say.     Yet  it  is  reasonably  a  probability  that  if  an 


224  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

early  protest  by  our  government  had  been  made,  ex- 
pressing the  moral  uprising  of  a  nation,  Germany 
would  have  thought  twice  before  bombarding  unfor- 
tified towns,  sinking  merchantmen  with  their  crews 
and  passengers,  and  carrying  out  her  harsh  policies 
in  conquered  Belgium;  and  her  future  policies 
v/ould  have  been  modified.  Otherwise,  why  has  she 
sought  to  obtain  by  an  organized  propaganda  the 
moral  support  of  the  United  States?  No  one  has 
more  emphatically  insisted  upon  the  advantage  ac- 
cruing from  the  moral  support  of  neutrals  than  Bis- 
marck. He  made  it  one  of  the  foundation  stones  of 
his  diplomatic  strategy  and  expressed  it  in  his  fa- 
mous declaration:  "If  we  attack,  the  whole  weight 
of  the  imponderables,  which  weigh  much  heavier 
than  material  weights,  will  be  on  the  side  of  the  ad- 
versaries whom  we  have  attacked." 

As  one  of  the  ablest  writers  on  the  war.  Profes- 
sor Munroe  Smith,!  has  pointed  out,  it  was  just 
these  imponderables — "love  of  independence,  fidel- 
ity to  treaty  engagements  and  resentment  against 
flagrant  wrong" — that  determined  Belgium's  hope- 
less resistance  to  Germany  against  overwhelming 
force.  The  failure  of  German  military  strategy  was 
due  to  overlooking  these  imponderables.  The 
moral  protest  of  American  sentiment  is  an  impon- 
derable. 

But,  waiving  this  point,  there  is  another  and  co- 
gent reason  why  it  would  "do  good"  to  have  the  na- 

t  Military  Strategy  versus  Diplomacy  in  Bismarck's  Time  and 
Afterwards;  Political  Science  Quarterly,  March,  1915. 


The  American  Conscience,  1014-15      225 

tional  conscience  express  itself  by  protest.  This  rea- 
son is  because  of  our  duty  to  ourselves  and  to  our 
own  ideals  of  right  and  humanity.  It  is  for  ourselves, 
even  if  not  for  others,  that  we  should  sj)eak  out. 

History  shows  that  the  moral  conscience  of  a  na- 
tion, as  well  as  of  the  individual,  can  only  be  main- 
tained by  standing  up  for  its  own  ideals,  for  what 
it  believes  to  be  right.  If,  when  our  conscience  is 
shocked,  we  do  not  do  this,  it  soon  becomes  blunted 
and  callous,  and  we  cease  to  have  convictions  that 
will  inflexibly  determine  the  attitude  of  the  nation 
when  moral  issues  are  presented.  Already,  appar- 
ently, our  conscience  has  become  dulled  to  the  atroc- 
ities of  this  war.  At  first  we  were  stunned,  we 
could  scarcely  realize  the  horror  of  it  all.  Then  we 
were  silent.  Then  our  conscience  became  blunted, 
callous,  and  now  we  take  it  all  as  a  matter  of  course. 
A  few  days  ago  we  read  that  the  British  merchant 
steamer  Tanistan  was,  without  warning,  torpedoed 
by  a  submarine  and  went  down  with  all  her  crew, 
saving  one.  We  read  also  that  the  British  steamer 
Blackwood  was  similarly  torpedoed  while  the  crew 
of  the  submarine,  which  came  up  from  below,  made 
no  attempt  to  assist  in  the  rescue,  but  coolly  looked 
on.  Then  it  was  a  Dutch  vessel  and  now  an  English 
ship  crowded  with  passengers.  We  read  again 
that  a  neutral  Swedish  merchant  vessel  is  sunk,  w  ith 
all  the  crew,  and  we  pass  on  to  the  next  item  with 
hardly  a  conscious  emotion.  To-morrow  it  may  be 
the  Lusitania.t  or  even  the  American  ship  Phila- 

t  The  LiisUania  was  sunk  about  a  month  later,  May  8. 


226  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

delphia.  Such  news  items  of  tlie  day  form  simply 
a  paragraph  to  be  casually  read  with  a  blunted  con- 
science— forgotten  to-morrow ! 

If  we  think  our  national  ideals  and  our  national 
conscience  are  worth  preserving,  we  must  be  will- 
ing to  express  publicly  that  conscience,  and  with 
no  uncertain  voice.  And  if  we  wish  American  sen- 
timent to  be  an  "imponderable"  that  will  influence 
not  only  our  own  Government  but  world-thought 
and  the  decisions  of  other  nations,  we  must  insist 
upon  being  heard.  William  Lloyd  Garrison  was 
actuated  by  the  spirit  of  both  these  motives  when 
he  wrote  the  memorable  w^ords  engraved  by  Boston 
on  the  pedestal  of  his  statue : 

"I  am  in  earnest.  I  will  not  equivocate. 
I  will  not  excuse.  I  will  not  retreat  a 
single  inch,  and  I  will  be  heard." 

We  will  all  admit  that  an  individual  is  a  man  of 
character  according  as  his  conduct  is  inflexibly  de- 
termined by  fixed  convictions.  Well,  the  same  is 
equally  true  collectively  of  a  nation.  And  when  a 
nation  that  meditates  war,  or  is  engaged  in  war, 
knows  in  advance  that  any  intended  action  will  in- 
exorably meet  with  the  resistance  of  the  moral  con- 
victions of  neutral  nations,  it  will,  as  Bismarck  coun- 
selled, hesitate  before  it  loses  the  advantage  of  that 
neutral  nation's  moral  support. 

It  will,  then,  "do  good"  to  have  the  national  con- 
science speak  out,  because  a  nation  that  thus  as- 
serts and  maintains  unshaken  its  convictions,  will 


The  American  Conscience,  1914^-15       227 

itself  be  deterred  by  those  convictions  from  com- 
mitting unjustifiable  acts  v/hen  tempted  by  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  moment,  and  also  be  a  moral  force 
in  deterring  other  nations  from  making  unjust  wars 
and  violating  international  laws  of  warfare.  There- 
fore is  it  a  duty  to  ourselves. 

II 

Let  us  not  forget  that  in  protesting  against  Ger- 
man methods  of  carrying  on  the  war  we  protest 
against  more  than  the  actual  barbarities  themselves. 
These  are  only  the  expression  of  German  political 
and  militarj^  philosophy,  of  the  German  national 
conscience.  In  protesting  we  would  raise  our  voice, 
therefore,  against  those  German  ideals  and  that 
German  culture  which  teaches  that  "might  goes  be- 
fore right";  "that  the  State  is  power  and  war  is  its 
first  most  elementary  function";  that  war  is  in  itself 
a  good  thing,  "the  basis  of  all  healthy  development" 
and  "a  moral  necessity"  demanded  by  "political 
idealism";  that  strong  states  have  a  moral  right  to 
overcome  weak  states  which  might  to  go  to  the  wall; 
that  "efforts  directed  towards  the  abolition  of  war 
must  be  termed  not  only  foolish  but  absolutely  un- 
moral and  unworthy  the  human  race";  that  "the 
idea  of  perpetual  peace"  is  "a  profoundly  unethical 
conception";  that  in  war  all  things  are  permissible 
for  the  State  to  gain  its  ends;  that  "inexorability 
and  seemingly  hideous  callousness  are  among  the 
attributes  necessary  to  him  who  would  achieve  great 


228  The  Creed  of  DeutscJdum 

things  in  war"  (Field  Marshal  von  der  Goltz) ; 
that  "in  concluding  treaties  the  State  does  so  always 
with  the  tacit  reservation  that  there  is  no  power  be- 
yond and  above  it  to  which  it  is  responsible,  and  it 
must  be  the  sole  judge  as  to  whether  it  is  expedi- 
ent to  respect  its  obligations" ;  that  "he  who  com- 
mands, what  need  has  he  of  agreements?";  that  it 
is  a  crime  in  a  statesman  not  to  seize  opportunities 
to  make  war  upon  a  rival  that  seems  likely  to  be- 
come stronger  than  itself,  or  is  "weakened  and  ham- 
pered by  affairs  at  home  and  abroad" ;  "that  the  acts 
of  a  State  cannot  be  judged  by  the  standard  of  in- 
dividual morality." 

These  are  a  few  of  the  many  maxims  that  might 
be  taken  at  random  from  the  writings  of  German 
publicists  and  military  writers.  They  fairly  express 
the  national  conscience  of  Germany,  and  are  exem- 
plified by  the  methods  adopted  in  inciting  and  car- 
rying on  this  war.  They  are  not,  therefore,  merely 
academic  philosophies,  they  are  ideals  which  have 
passed  into  the  thought  of  the  present  generation, 
and  have  been  endorsed  by  the  military  party  re- 
sponsible for  the  crime  of  this  war. 

That  German  culture  is  responsible  for  militarism 
has  been  thus  asserted  by  one  German  writer,  G. 
Fuchs:  "We  Germans  have  a  characteristic  form 
of  culture  in  nothing  at  all  except  as  soldiers" 
"The  German  nation  owes  its  present  position  as  a 
European  Power  to  the  only  form  of  culture  which 
it  has  as  yet  created,  its  army.  It  will  need  to  as- 
sert itself  as  an  International  Power  by  a  similar 


The  American  Conscience,  1914-15      229 

manifestation,  or  disappear  dishonorably."  "The 
army  is  the  only  great  organism  of  culture,  compris- 
ing the  entire  nation,  which  we  possess."  "All  cul- 
ture is  bought  at  the  price  of  blood." 

As  one  writer,  a  close  and  hitherto  sj^mpathetic 
student  for  many  years  of  German  Government  and 
life  (W.  H.  Dawson)  has  said:  "Germany  stands 
forth,  on  its  own  confession,  as  the  representative 
of  national  and  social  conceptions,  ideals,  and  aims 
which  are  entirely  alien  to  those  pursued  by  other 
civilized  nations.  Its  culture  is  a  tribal  culture 
based  on  force,  yet  it  seeks  to  impose  this  culture 
on  mankind  for  mankind's  benefit." 

If  the  people  of  our  country  were  fully  cognizant 
of,  or  fully  realized  the  meaning  of  German  mili- 
tary and  political  culture,  I  believe  there  would  be 
an  uprising  of  national  sentiment  which  would 
sweep  our  Government  before  it  and  compel  a  pro- 
test against  Germany's  methods  in  this  war.  Every 
student  of  German  culture  has  arrived  at  the  con- 
clusion that  their  methods  in  this  war  are  not  simply 
momentarily  chosen  expedients  to  meet  military  ex- 
igencies. To  so  regard  them  is  a  very  superficial 
point  of  view.  There  can  be  no  manner  of  doubt 
that  they  carry  out  long  accepted  principles  and 
long-thought-out  policies  ingrained  in  the  thought 
of  the  autocratic  military  caste.  They  are  the  ex- 
pression of  a  philosophy  of  national  life,  of  a  polit- 
ical philosophy  formulated  by  its  philosophers,  his- 
torians, publicists,  statesmen  and  military  writers, 
and  adopted  by  the  autocratic  class  that  rules  Ger- 


230  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

many.  They  are  the  expression  of  German  ideals 
of  government,  of  world  power  and  of  the  methods 
of  advancing  them.  Breaking  the  treaty  with  Bel- 
gium and  the  invasion  of  that  country  was  not  sim- 
ply an  emergency  measure ;  it  was  the  putting  into 
practice  of  a  deep  ingrained  political  philosophy. 
The  policy  of  terrorism  which  incited  the  atrocities 
in  Belgium,  burned  down  cities  and  towns,  took  and 
killed  hostages,  shot  down  innocent  citizens  to  in- 
timidate the  guilty,  commandeered  the  food  of  seven 
millions  of  people  and  left  them  to  starve — all  this 
was  not  simply  the  sequel  of  a  novel  emergency 
measure;  it  was  the  practical  expression  of  a  po- 
litical and  military  culture  which  may  be  read  over 
and  over  again  in  official  literature;  and  so  with  the 
killing  of  non-combatants  by  bombs  and  the  sinking 
of  merchantmen  with  their  crews  and  passengers. 
It  was  the  expression  of  the  national  conscience. 
Nothing,  I  think,  shows  this  interpretation  more 
plainly  than  the  "stormy  applause"  which  greeted 
Chancellor  von  Bethmann-Hollweg's  now  historic 
speech  in  the  Reichstag,  when  he  proclaimed  the  in- 
tention of  the  govermnent  to  "hack  its  way  through 
Belgium."  One  would  have  thought  that  the  very 
awfulness  of  that  violation,  even  as  a  "military  ne- 
cessity," would  have  awakened  silent  awe  in  the 
assemblage.  But,  as  the  Vossische  Zeitung  re- 
ported: "The  jubilation  which  greeted  these  words 
baffles  description.  One  man  spoke  here  in  the  name 
of  the  nation." 

From  this  point  of  view  Germanism  and  Pan- 


The  American  Conscience,   1914-15       231 

Germanism  are  the  greatest  moral  questions  that 
have  been  presented  to  America  and  the  world  since 
the  question  of  slavery  was  settled. 

Between  these  ideals  of  German  autocracy  and 
the  ideals  of  American  democracy  there  is  an  irrec- 
oncilable, and,  what  I  firmhj  believe  will  prove  to 
he  the  case,  an  unavoidable  conflict.  It  is  more  than 
a  figure  of  speech  to  say  that  war — a  moral  war — 
is  on  between  the  American  people  and  Germany. 
But  that  war  is  not  with  German  democracy,  with 
whom  lies  the  future  hope  of  the  Empire.  Between 
the  20,000,000  of  plain  people  of  Germany,  its  de- 
mocracy, and  American  democracy,  there  is  a  bond 
of  sympathy  based  on  common  ideals,  common  as- 
pirations, common  love  of  political  liberty.  The 
moral  war  is  with  Germany's  autocracy,  and  it  is 
against  this  ruling  caste  that  American  sentiment 
should,  and  sooner  or  later  will,  utter  its  protest. 
It  will  not,  and  should  not  be  content  with  a  pusil- 
lanimous morality. 

When  our  own  American  material  "rights,"  our 
ships,  our  cargoes,  our  trade  in  cotton  or  wheat  or 
copper,  our  money,  are  molested,  we  protest  quickly 
enough,  and  it  is  fair  to  say,  if  an  American  life  is 
threatened — though  not  in  JVIexico.  And  when  a 
bungling,  stupid  German  naval  officer,  without  au- 
thority from  his  government,  sinks  the  American 
ship  Frye,  we  protest  and  demand  reparation,  as  we 
should.  And  now  when  England  and  France  de- 
fending the  cause  of  democracy,  the  world  over,  an- 
nounce a  modified  blockade  of  German  ports  as  a 


232  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

retaliatory  means  of  stopping  German  barbarities 
and  bringing  this  war  to  an  end,  a  clamor  goes  up 
that  we  demand  our  technical  rights  and  protest  in 
the  interest  of  commerce.  Apparently  our  commer- 
cial interests  are  not  willing  to  make  this  temporary 
sacrifice,  but  there  is  talk  of  retaliation  excited  by 
German  propaganda. 

But  when  our  ideals,  the  ideals  of  the  American 
conscience  are  defied — we  remain  silent.  And  yet 
idealism  for  humanity  has  been  the  strongest  moral 
element  in  our  national  life.  If  Sumner  and  Phil- 
lips and  Garrison  and  Lowell  and  Andrew  and  Lin- 
coln were  alive  to-day  would  they  remain  silent? 
And  so  we  may  ask,  "Is  the  American  conscience 
dead?"  Or  is  it  that  we  are  awaiting  another  Whit- 
tier  to  sing  as  in  the  olden  time? — 

"Tell  us  not  of  banks  and  tariffs, — cease 

your  paltry  pedler  cries, — 
Shall  the  good  State  sink  her  honor  that 

your  gambling  stocks  may  rise? 
Would  ye  barter  man  for  cotton? — That 

your  gains  may  sum  up  higher. 
Must  we  kiss  the  feet  of  Moloch,  pass  our 

children  through  the  fire? 
Is  the  dollar  only  real? — God  and  truth  and 

right  a  dream? 
Weighed  against  your  lying  ledgers  must  our 

manhood  kick  the  beam.?" 


THE  DISINTEGRATION  OF  AN  IDEAL 


THE  DISINTEGRATION  OF  AN  IDEAL  * 

I 

THE  IDEAL 

IN  1821  the  Grecian  "Senate"  sent  a  formal 
appeal  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  for 
sympathetic  support  in  the  rebellion  of  Greece 
against  Turkish  oppression,  just  as  the  Belgian 
government  sent  an  appeal  in  1914  protesting 
against  the  violation  of  Belgian  independence  by- 
Germany  and  the  atrocities  committed  by  the  Ger- 
man army. 

"The  interest  felt  in  the  struggle  rapidly  in- 
creased in  the  United  States.  Local  committees 
were  formed,  animated  appeals  were  made,  and 
funds  collected  with  a  view  to  the  relief  of  the  vic- 
tims of  the  war."  Accordingly,  on  the  assembling 
of  Congress  in  December,  1823,  President  Monroe 
in  his  annual  message  addressed  the  following  words 
to  the  Congress: 

A  strong  hope  has  been  long  entertained,  founded  on 
the  heroic  struggle  of  the  Greeks,  that  they  would  suc- 
ceed in  their  contest  and  resume  their  equal  station 
among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  .  .  .  From  the  facts 
which  have  come  to  our  knowledge,  there  is  good  cause 
to  believe  that  their  enemy  has  lost  forever  all  dominion 

*  Printed  in  the  New  York  Times,  November  21,  1915. 

235 


236  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

over  them;  that  Greece  will  become  again  an  independent 
nation.  That  she  may  obtain  that  rank  is  the  object  of 
our  most  ardent  wishes.     (Italics  not  in  original.) 

The  President,  plainly,  did  not  pretend  to  moral 
or  political  neutrality.  On  the  contrary,  he  did  not 
hesitate  to  express  the  sympathy  of  the  Adminis- 
tration and  the  nation  in  the  struggle  that  Greece 
was  maintaining  to  attain  her  independence  and 
sovereignty.  In  complete  accord  with  this  message 
of  the  President,  Webster  introduced  a  resolution 
to  provide  for  defraying  the  expense  incident  to  the 
appointment  of  an  agent  or  commissioner  to  be  sent 
to  Greece  to  investigate  the  conditions  there. 

The  specific  intent  of  the  resolution  was  not 
a  matter  of  great  importance.  On  its  face  it  only 
purported  to  seek  detailed  information  on  the  ex- 
isting conditions  in  Greece,  just  as  an  agent  might 
have  been  sent  at  the  beginning  of  this  war  to  Bel- 
gium to  collect  information  regarding  the  condi- 
tions from  which  the  inhabitants  were  suffering  as 
a  result  of  the  German  invasion.  The  agent,  or 
commissioner,  was  not  to  be  a  diplomatic  represen- 
tative to  the  Grecian  Government.  Whether  such 
an  agent  should  be  sent  or  not  was  only  a  matter 
of  expediency,  and  probably  Webster  himself  cared 
very  little,  it  being  a  minor  matter.  Indeed,  Web- 
ster said  he  "did  not  desire  that  the  resolution 
should  be  at  present  acted  upon,  but  simply  that 
it  lie  upon  the  table  for  the  consideration  and  de- 
liberate reflection  of  the  House."  The  resolution 
ostensibly  sought  to  carry  out  in  a  practical  form 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  237 

the  President's  policy  of  moral  support.     But  its 
author  had  another  object  in  view  which  was  more 
than  an  expression  of  sympathy  of  the  American 
nation  with  a  people  struggling  both  against  the  op- 
pression of  the  Turks  and  the  hostile  attitude  of 
the  allied  monarchies  of  Europe.    It  was  not  really 
necessary  for  Congress  to  define  our  attitude.    This 
had  already  been  done  by  the  President.     Monroe 
had  laid  down  the  policy  of  the  Government  in  its 
relation  to  Greece,  and  this  was  to  give  the  moral 
support  of  our  nation  to  the  cause  for  which  the 
Greeks  were  fighting.     In  this  he  had  the  backing 
throughout  the  country  of  public  opinion,  which  was 
universally  in  sympathy  with  Greece.     Action  by 
Congress  was  no  more  necessary  than  it  was  in  re- 
ply to  that  part  of  the  message  now  known  as  the 
Monroe  Doctrine,  which  stated  our  attitude  toward 
the  threatened  attempt  of  the  Allied  Nations  of 
Europe  to  interfere  with  the  republics  of  South 
America.    That  statement  of  our  policy  was  never 
acted  upon  by  Congress,  but  it  has  become  a  fixed 
national  policy.     So  the  President's  statement  of 
his  policy  toward  Greece  required  no  action  by 
Congress.  But  Webster  sought  in  the  occasion,  not 
only  to  express  his  complete  accord  with  the  Pres- 
ident, but  to  lay  before  Congress  and  the  country 
his  convictions  as  to  what  our  larger  policy  ought 
to  be  when  a  small  nation  is  oppressed  by  a  greater 
power,  particularly  when  that  power  pretends  by 
the  authority  of  autocracy  and  Divine  Right  to  in- 
terfere with  the  destinies  of  a  free  people  or  a  peo- 


238  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

pie  struggling  to  be  free.  Greece,  as  he  expressly 
stated,  was  only  an  example  of  the  prmciple. 

The  political  conditions  in  Europe  with  which 
Monroe  and  Webster  dealt  were  very  different 
from  what  they  are  to-day,  and  the  war  that  was  be- 
ing waged  had  a  very  different  purpose  from  the 
present  war.  The  Holy  Alliance  has  ceased  to  ex- 
ist; the  war  was  a  revolution  for  independence. 
But  it  is  remarkable  how  modern  are  Webster's 
thought  and  argument.  Much  of  his  speech  might 
be  delivered  to-day,  when  half  the  world  is  dying 
because  of  the  aggression  of  two  autocratic  mon- 
archies. The  names  of  Belgium  and  Luxemburg 
and  Serbia  might  be  substituted  for  Greece,  and  the 
atrocities  committed  in  Louvain,  Aerschot,  Ter- 
monde,  Hartlepool,  Scarborough,  and  on  the  high 
seas,  or  any  one  of  a  score  of  places  in  France  and 
Serbia,  might  be  substituted  for  Scio  and  Cyprus 
and  Greece;  the  German  policy  of  "frightfulness" 
and  "terrorism,"  for  the  same  Turkish  policy  in 
1821,  then  upheld  and  morally  justified  by  the  al- 
lied powers. 

Webster  speaks  of  Greece  and  Turkey  and  the 
Holy  Alliance,  but  when  we  read  his  words  to-day 
the  pictures  that  come  into  our  minds  are  not  of 
those  states  and  that  alliance  of  the  far-away  time 
of  1821,  but  of  the  small  states  whose  peoples  and 
whose  sovereignties  have  been  wronged  in  1914,  and 
of  another  alliance. 

Then  again,  though  the  Holy  Alliance  is  dead, 
one  cannot  help  thinking  that  its  principles  still  sur- 


Tlie  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  239 

vive  when  one  recalls  to  mind  the  "Little  Peoples" 
held  in  subjection  against  their  will  and  national 
aspirations  by  the  autocratic  empires  of  middle  and 
eastern  Europe — of  the  Poles,  the  Bohemians 
(Czechs),  the  Slovaks,  the  Croatians,  the  Slovenes, 
the  Ruthenians,  the  Litluianians,  the  Finns  and  Ar- 
menians. These  people  are  now  "dumb  under  an 
iron  censorship." 

Tlie  reason  for  the  modernness  of  Webster's 
thought  is  that  he  dealt  with  international  morality 
and  with  principles  that  do  not  change  with  time. 
His  protest  on  behalf  of  Greece  was  a  concrete  ap- 
j^licatiDn  of  these  fundamental  ideals.  His  motive 
is  eloquently  expressed  in  his  peroration : 

I  close,  then,  Sir,  with  repeating  that  the  object  of  this 
resolution  is  to  avail  ourselves  of  the  interesting  occasion 
of  the  Greek  revolution  to  make  our  protest  against  the 
doctrines  of  the  allied  powers,  both  as  they  are  laid 
down  in  principle  and  as  they  are  applied  in  practice. 
I  think  it  right,  too.  Sir,  not  to  be  unseasonable  in  the 
expression  of  our  regard,  and,  as  far  as  that  goes,  in  a 
manifestation  of  our  s^'mpathy  with  a  long-oppressed  and 
now  struggling  people.  I  am  not  of  those  who  would,  in 
the  hour  of  utmost  peril,  withhold  such  encouragement 
as  might  be  properly  and  lawfully  given,  and,  when  the 
crisis  should  be  past,  overwhelm  the  rescued  sufferer  with 
kindness  and  caresses.  The  Greeks  address  the  civilized 
world  with  a  pathos  not  easy  to  be  resisted.  They  invoke 
our  favor  by  more  moving  considerations  than  can  well 
belong  to  the  condition  of  any  other  people.  They 
stretch  out  their  arms  to  the  Christian  communities  of  the 
earth,  beseeching  them  bv  a  generous  recollection  of  their 
ancestors,  by  the  consideration  of  their  ruined  cities  and 
villages,  by  their  wives  and  children  sold  into  an  accursed 
slavery,  by  their  blood,  which  they  seem  willing  to  pour 


240  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

out  like  water,  by  the  common  faith  and  in  the  name 
which  unites  all  Christians,  that  they  would  extend  to 
them  at  least  some  token  of  compassionate  regard. 

The  circumstances  that  led  to  Monroe's  public 
statement  of  the  attitude  of  his  Administration  to- 
ward Greece  may  be  briefly  told,  but  it  is  Webster's 
cogent  argument  and  moral  stand  on  behalf  of  in- 
ternational morality  and  democracy  that  have  in- 
terest for  us  to-day,  and  let  us  see  the  change  that 
has  taken  place  in  the  national  policy  and  how  far 
we  have  traveled  from  the  pillars  that  marked  our 
ideals  in  the  early  days  of  the  republic. 

Early  in  1821  a  revolution  burst  out  in  Greece 
against  the  tyranny  of  Turkish  rule.  By  that  rev- 
olution, we  all  know,  Greece  eventually  won  her 
independence  after  nearly  eight  years  of  an  inde- 
scribably bloody  war.  But  this  was  only  after  the 
aroused  conscience  of  the  people  of  Europe  and  the 
United  States  had  forced  the  monarchies  of  Europe 
— England,  France,  and  Russia — to  break  with 
Metternich  and  the  principles  of  the  Holy  Alliance 
and  to  intervene.  During  the  first  six  years  Greece 
had  fought  alone,  unaided. 

During  the  first  year  the  progress  of  the  revolu- 
tion was  favorable  to  Greece.  Then  there  followed 
a  policy  and  campaign  of  "frightfulness"  which  it 
would  be  difficult  for  us  in  this  twentieth  century 
to  take  in  or  believe,  were  it  not  that  we  have  seen 
with  our  own  eyes  in  the  last  year  a  very  perfect 
example  of  this  policy,  complete  in  almost  all  its 
details.     The  Turkish  atrocities  in  Greece  in  1822 


Tlie  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  241 

can  be  well  appreciated  by  a  consideration  of  pres- 
ent-day German  atrocities  in  Belgium,  France,  and 
England,  and  the  sinking  of  the  Lusitania  and 
other  ships  on  the  high  seas. 

Early  in  the  second  year  of  the  war  of  Grecian 
independence  there  followed,  to  quote  the  words 
of  Daniel  Y\^ebster  in  his  memorable  speech  in 
the  House  of  Representatives,  "that  indescribable 
enormity,  that  appalling  monument  of  barbarian 
cruelty,  the  destruction  of  Scio;  a  scene  I  shall  not 
attempt  to  describe ;  a  scene  from  which  human  na- 
ture shrinks  shuddering  away;  a  scene  having 
hardly  a  parallel  in  the  history  of  fallen  man."  The 
Turkish  fleet  had  landed  an  army  of  15,000  men 
on  the  beautiful  Island  of  Scio.  "Here,"  Web- 
ster tells  us,  "was  the  seat  of  modern  Greek  lit- 
erature; here  were  libraries,  printing  presses,  and 
other  establishments  which  indicate  some  advance- 
ment in  refinement  and  knowledge.  .  .  .  There 
was  nothing  to  resist  such  an  army.  These  troops 
immediately  entered  the  city  and  began  an  indis- 
criminate massacre.  The  city  was  fired;  and  in 
four  days  the  fire  and  sword  of  the  Turk  rendered 
the  beautiful  Scio  a  clotted  mass  of  blood  and  ashes. 
The  details  are  too  shocking  to  be  recited.  Forty 
thousand  women  and  children,  unhappily  saved 
from  the  general  destruction,  were  afterward  sold 
in  the  market  of  Smyrna,  and  sent  off  into  distant 
and  hopeless  servitude." 

The  population  of  Scio  and  the  actual  number 
massacred  are  only  roughly  known,  but  according 


242  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

to  a  modern  writer,  it  is  believed  that  out  of  90,000 
inhabitants,  23,000  were  killed  and  43,000  were  sold 
as  slaves. 

I  have  no  intention  of  entering  into  an  account 
of  the  Grecian  war  of  independence,  or  of  discuss- 
ing the  indefensible  methods  of  warfare  emj)loyed 
on  both  sides.  I  mention  these  atrocities  merely  to 
call  attention  to  events  which  largely  determined 
the  response  of  the  United  States  Govermnent,  not 
only  to  the  appeal  of  Greece  for  sympathetic  sup- 
port, but  to  the  hostile  attitude  toward  Greece  of 
the  continental  monarchies. 

In  view  of  the  political  situation  in  Europe,  the 
stand  taken  by  the  President,  and  supported  by 
Webster,  was  more  than  a  declaration  of  sympathy 
by  our  Government  for  a  small  nation  oppressed  by 
an  autocratic  and  powerful  one.  That  declaration 
was,  indeed,  outspoken,  unequivocal  and  humani- 
tarian. But  the  opinions  expressed  by  the  Presi- 
dent had  a  deeper  meaning.  They  rebuked,  and 
were  intended  to  rebuke,  the  Sovereigns  of  the  Al- 
lied Powers — commonly  called  the  Holy  Alliance — 
who  had  thrown  all  their  moral  support  in  favor 
of  Turkey  and  against  Greece.  The  Allied  Powers, 
dominated  by  Prussia,  Austria  and  Russia,  had 
only  recently,  sitting  in  congress  at  Verona,  "dis- 
couraged, discountenanced,  and  denounced"  the 
Greeks  for  their  resistance  to  Turkish  oppression. 
Metternich,  the  famous  Austrian  statesman  and 
master  of  European  diplomacy,  who  dominated  the 
Holy  Alliance,  and  through  it  governed  Europe, 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  243 

had  said:  "Three  or  four  hundred  thousand  mdi- 
viduals  hanged,  butchered,  impaled  down  there, 
hardly  count." 

In  this  situation,  in  the  face  of  the  most  powerful 
nations  of  Europe,  the  President  of  the  United 
States  did  not  hesitate  to  take  a  decidedly  antago- 
nistic position  and  to  offer  the  moral  support  of 
the  nation  to  the  cause  of  liberty  and  human  rights. 
To  appreciate  fully  the  significance  of  our  stand 
one  must  recall,  what  every  schoolboy  knows,  that 
the  Holy  Alliance  was  based  on  the  doctrine  of  the 
Divine  Right  of  Kings,  just  as  the  German  autoc- 
racy maintains  that  doctrine  to-day. 

In  this  connection  it  is  curiously  interesting  to 
note  the  similarity  of  the  sentiments  and  language 
of  Francis  I.,  Emperor  of  Austria,  one  of  the  three 
chief  supporters  of  the  Holy  Alliance  in  1821,  and 
of  the  present  German  Emperor.  Both  sovereigns 
maintained  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Right  to  rule 
and  the  determination  to  tolerate  no  opposition  to 
the  autocratic  will.  "I  want  faithful  subjects,"  said 
Francis  I.  "Be  such:  that  is  your  duty.  He  who 
would  serve  me  must  do  what  I  command.  He 
who  cannot  do  this,  or  who  comes  full  of  new  ideas, 
may  go  his  way.  If  he  does  not,  I  shall  send  him." 
And  in  a  similar  spirit  William  II.,  the  present 
Emperor,  said:  ''Those  who  are  willing  to  help 
me  I  heartily  welcome  whoever  they  may  be:  those 
who  oppose  me  in  this  task  I  will  crush."  Again: 
"There  is  but  one  law,  and  that  is  my  law."  And 
again:     "One  only  is  master  within  the  Empire, 


244  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

and  I  will  tolerate  no  other." 

In  accordance  with  this  principle,  the  allied  sov- 
ereigns at  Laybach  in  1821  announced  that  "use- 
ful and  necessary  changes  in  legislation  and  in  the 
administration  of  States  ought  only  to  emanate 
from  the  free  will  and  intelligent  and  well-weighed 
conviction  of  those  whom  God  has  rendered  respon- 
sible for  power.  All  that  deviates  from  this  line 
necessarily  leads  to  disorder,  commotion,  and  evils 
far  more  insupportable  than  those  which  they  pre- 
tend to  remedy." 

It  was  on  this  principle  that  the  continental  mon- 
archies denounced  the  Greeks,  though  the  whole 
world  recoiled  from  the  cruelties  they  suffered  at 
the  hands  of  their  oppressors,  just  as  the  world  to- 
day recoils  from  the  cruelties  suffered  by  the  Bel- 
gians and  Serbians.  Webster,  therefore,  in  pro- 
testing against  the  treatment  of  Greece  by  Turkey 
and  the  Allied  Powers,  directed  the  main  force  of 
his  argument  against  the  principles  of  the  Holy 
Alliance.  And  he  brought  all  the  power  of  his 
splendid  eloquence  to  bear  to  show  to  the  American 
people  how  "utterly  hostile"  those  principles  were 
"to  our  own  free  institutions."  The  question  was 
very  different  from  that  raised  by  Monroe  in  that 
part  of  his  message,  now  known  as  the  Monroe 
Doctrine,  dealing  with  the  designs  of  the  Holy  Al- 
liance upon  the  South  American  Republics.  There 
it  was  a  question  of  direct  interference  with  Re- 
publican forms  of  government  and  the  forcible  im- 
position of  their  system  of  government  upon  this 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  245 

hemisphere.  This  we  should  regard,  he  said,  as 
"an  unfriendly  disposition  toward  the  United 
States." 

It  was,  therefore,  solely  on  the  ground  of  prin- 
ciple and  not  because  of  any  such  "unfriendly  dis- 
position," toward  us  or  infringement  of  our  legal 
rights  on  sea  or  land,  or  interference  with  our  com- 
merce, that  Webster  urged  that  the  moral  support 
of  the  nation  be  given  to  the  cause  of  Greece. 

"I  wish  to  take  occasion,"  he  said,  "of  the  strug- 
gle of  an  interesting  and  gallant  people  in  the  cause 
of  liberty  and  Christianity,  to  draw  the  attention 
of  the  House  to  the  circumstances  which  have  ac- 
companied that  struggle,  and  to  the  principles 
which  appear  to  have  governed  the  conduct  of  the 
great  States  of  Europe  in  regard  to  it;  and  to  the 
effects  and  consequences  of  these  principles  upon 
the  independence  of  nations,  and  especially  upon 
the  institutions  of  free  governments." 

And  referring  to  the  denunciation  by  the  Con- 
gress of  Verona  above  mentioned: 

We  see  here,  Mr.  Chairman,  the  direct  and  actual 
application  of  that  system  which  I  have  attempted  to 
describe.  We  see  it  in  the  very  case  of  Greece.  We 
learn,  authentically  and  indisputably,  that  the  allied 
powers,  holding  that  all  changes  in  legislation  and  admin- 
istration ought  to  proceed  from  Kings  alone,  were  wholly 
inexorable  to  the  sufferings  of  the  Greeks  and  entirely 
hostile  to  their  success.  Now  it  is  upon  this  practical 
result  of  the  principle  of  the  Continental  Powers  that  I 
wish  this  House  to  intimate  its  opinion.  The  great  ques- 
tion is  a  question  of  principle.  Greece  is  only  the  signal 
instance   of   the   application   of   that   principle.      If  the 


246  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

principle  be  right,  if  we  esteem  it  conformable  to  the  law 
of  nations,  if  we  have  nothing  to  say  against  it,  or  if  we 
deem  ourselves  unfit  to  express  an  opinion  on  the  subject, 
then,  of  course,  no  resolution  ought  to  pass.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  we  see  in  the  declaration  of  the  allied  powers 
jorinciples  not  only  utterly  hostile  to  our  own  free  insti- 
tutions, but  hostile  also  to  the  independence  of  all  nations, 
and  altogether  opposed  to  the  improvement  of  the  con- 
dition of  human  nature ;  if,  in  the  instance  before  us,  we 
see  a  most  striking  exposition  and  application  of  those 
principles,  and  if  we  deem  our  opinions  to  be  entitled  to 
any  weight  in  the  estimation  of  mankind,  then  I  think 
it  is  our  duty  to  adopt  some  such  measure  as  the  pro- 
posed resolution. 

One  of  the  most  objectionable  principles  held  by 
the  allied  powers  Webster  considered  to  be  the 
claim  of  "the  right  of  forcible  interference  in  the 
affairs  of  the  States." 

Webster's  speech  is  characterized  by  its  lofty  tone 
of  humanitarianism  and  profound  belief  in  the 
principles  upon  which  our  nation  is  founded. 
Throughout  it  there  breathes  the  love  of  liberty  and 
of  human  rights.  Self -restrained  and  without  pas- 
vsion  he  boldly  takes  his  stand  as  the  defender  of 
these  ideals,  and  he  would  have  the  nation  assert, 
without  equivocation,  the  national  conscience. 
They,  the  allied  nations,  had  "expressed  their  opin- 
ions," and  he  would  have  us  express  our  "different 
principles  and  different  sympathies." 

It  is  interesting,  too,  to  note  the  entire  subordi- 
nation of  selfish,  material  interest,  and  technical 
legal  rights  belonging  to  Americans.  His  protest 
is  bf^sed  entirely  on  the  broad  rights  of  mankind 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  247 

and  opposition  to  the  oppression  of  one  people  by 
another. 

Webster  anticipated  the  objection — the  admoni- 
tion which  we  received  in  recent  days  from  the 
President  when  we  read  day  by  day  of  the  viola- 
tion of  Belgium — that  we  should  scrupulously  re- 
main neutral  in  thought  as  well  as  speech,  and  mind 
our  own  business. 

As  it  is  never  difficult  to  recite  commonplace  remarks 
and  trite  aphorisms,  so  it  may  be  easy,  I  am  aware,  on 
this  occasion  to  remind  me  of  the  wisdom  which  dictates 
to  men  a  care  of  their  own  affairs,  and  admonishes  them, 
instead  of  searching  for  adventures  abroad,  to  leave  other 
men's  concerns  in  their  own  hands.  It  may  be  easy  to  call 
this  resolution  Quixotic,  the  emanation  of  a  crusading 
or  propagandist  spirit.  All  this,  and  more,  may  be 
readily  said ;  but  all  this,  and  more,  will  not  be  allowed 
to  fix  a  character  upon  this  proceeding  until  that  is 
proved  which  it  takes  for  granted.  Let  it  first  be  shown 
that  in  this  question  there  is  nothing  which  can  affect 
the  interest,  the  character,  or  the  duty  of  this  country. 
Let  it  be  proved  that  we  are  not  called  upon  by  either  of 
these  considerations  to  express  an  opinion  on  the  subject 
to  which  the  resolution  relates. 

The  propriety  of  a  protest  he  placed  upon  con- 
siderations of  our  own  duty,  of  our  character  and 
of  our  own  interest.  This  conception  of  duty  he 
returns  to  again  and  again;  thus  in  one  passage 
he  said  that  the  measure  which  he  proposed  he  con- 
sidered "due  to  our  own  character  and  called  for 
by  our  own  duty." 

And  again  he  argued: 

In    my   judgment,    the    subject    is    interesting   to    the 


-248  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

people  and  the  Government  of  this  country,  and  we  are 
called  upon,  by  considerations  of  great  weight  and  mo- 
ment, to  express  our  opinions  upon  it.  These  consid- 
erations, I  think,  spring  from  a  sense  of  our  own  duty, 
our  character,  and  our  own  interest.  I  wish  to  treat  the 
subject  on  such  grounds  exclusively  as  are  truly  Amer- 
ican. 

But  in  treating  the  subject  on  American  grounds 
he  rested  his  case  on  the  higher  plane  of  American 
ideals. 

"Let  this  be,  then,"  he  continued,  "and  as  far  as 
I  am  concerned  I  hope  it  will  be,  purely  an  Amer- 
ican discussion;  but  let  it  embrace,  nevertheless, 
everything  that  fairly  concerns  America.  Let  it 
comprehend  not  merely  her  present  advantage  but 
her  permanent  interest,  her  elevated  character  as 
one  of  the  free  States  of  the  world,  and  her  duty 
toward  those  great  principles  which  have  hitherto 
maintained  the  relative  independence  of  nations, 
and  which  have,  more  especially,  made  her  what 
she  is." 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Webster,  a  profound 
thinker  and  statesman,  by  "permanent  interest" 
had  in  mind,  as  he  later  on  argued,  not  material 
interests  or  legal  rights,  but  the  broad  interest  we 
had  in  resenting  the  breaking  of  international  law 
and  interference  with  the  rights  of  small  nations  by 
great  nations. 

It  is  true  Webster  in  arguing  from  this  ground 
struck  solely  at  the  pretensions  of  the  Holy  Al- 
liance, which  as  an  alliance  not  long  afterward 
came  to  a  timely  end.    But  it  is  no  perversion  of  his 


TJie  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  249 

argument  to  hold,  as  I  shall  later  point  out,  that 
the  principles  from  which  he  reasoned  are  equally 
applicable  to  the  policies  of  "Might  flakes  Right," 
and  "World  Empire,"  and  to  the  events  which  we 
have  seen  unfold  themselves  before  our  eyes  to- 
daj^  to  the  consideration  of  a  treaty  as  a  scrap  of 
paper,  the  violation  of  the  sovereignty  of  small 
States  by  a  powerful  neighbor,  the  violation  of  all 
the  civilized  laws  of  war  and  humanity,  the  policy 
of  "frightfulness"  and  "terrorism"  as  a  method  of 
warfare  employed  to-day  as  it  was  by  the  Turks 
against  the  Greeks,  and  the  general  breaking  of  in- 
ternational laws  on  the  plea  of  "necessity." 

Furthermore,  two  fundamental  principles  that 
underlay  the  Holy  Alliance  are  fundamental  to  the 
German  Government  to-day — that  of  the  divine 
right  of  kings  and  uncompromising  hostility  to  de- 
mocracy and  to  "government  of  the  people,  by  the 
people,  and  for  the  people."  To  these  two  prin- 
ciples can  be  largely  traced  the  existing  "German 
militarism"  which  is  responsible  for  this  war  and 
which  the  Allies  are  fighting  to  overthrow. 

A  careful  study  of  Webster's  attitude  of  mind, 
revealing,  as  it  does,  his  intense  love  of  liberty,  his 
profound  belief  in  government  by  the  people,  and 
his  respect  for  the  rights  of  man,  leave  no  doubt  in 
the  mind  that  he  would  be  as  ready  to-day,  if  he 
were  alive,  to  protest  against  the  violation  of  these 
principles  as  he  was  against  the  violation  of  Grecian 
liberty  and  independence. 

The  modernness  of  Webster's  thought  is  brought 


250  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

out  vividly  by  a  question  which  he  anticipated — 
the  same  question  which  we  have  heard  so  often 
asked  when  a  protest  against  the  violation  of  Bel- 
gium and  Germany's  inhuman  methods  of  warfare 
has  been  suggested.  But  the  feeble  answer  given 
in  these  later  days  falls  sadly  short  of  the  noble  re- 
ply with  which  Webster  rebuked  his  imaginary  op- 
ponent. This  passage  deserves  to  be  learned  by 
every  American  and  indelibly  engraved  in  the  con- 
science of  the  nation. 

It  may,  in  the  next  place,  be  asked,  perhaps,  supposing, 
all  this  to  be  true,  what  can  we  do?  Are  we  to  go  to  war? 
Are  we  to  interfere  in  the  Greek  cause,  or  any  other 
European  cause?  Are  we  to  endanger  our  pacific  rela- 
tions? No,  certainly  not.  What,  then,  the  question 
recurs,  remains  for  us?  If  we  will  not  endanger  our  own 
peace,  if  we  will  neither  furnish  armies  nor  navies  to  the 
cause  which  we  think  the  just  one,  what  is  there  within  our 
power? 

He  then  went  on  to  characterize  the  part  which 
the  imponderable  force  of  public  opinion  and  moral 
sentiment  plays  in  restraining  and  punishing  the 
violations  of  human  rights — that  force  which 
France  and  Belgium  and  England  have  appealed 
in  vain  to  America  to  bring  to  the  aid  of  humanity 
in  this  war: 

It  is  already  able  to  oppose  the  most  formidable  ob- 
stiTjction  to  the  progress  of  injustice  and  oppression; 
and  as  it  grows  more  intelligent  and  more  intense,  it 
will  be  more  and  more  formidable.  It  may  be  silenced  by 
military  power,  but  it  cannot  be  conquered.  It  is  elastic, 
irrepressible,  and  invulnerable  to  the  weapons  of  ordinary 
warfare.     It  is  that  impassable,  unextinguishable  enemy 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  251 

of  mere  violence  and  arbitrary  rule,  which,  like  Milton's 
angels. 

Vital  in  every  part  .   .   . 

Cannot,  but  by  annihilating,  die. 

Until  this  be  propitiated  or  satisfied,  it  is  vain  for 
power  to  talk  either  of  triumphs  or  of  repose — no  matter 
what  fields  are  desolated,  what  fortresses  surrendered, 
what  armies  subdued,  or  what  provinces  overrun. 

Then,  after  narrating  the  unhappy  events  in 
Spain: 

It  is  nothing  that  arrests  and  confiscation  and  exe- 
cution sweep  away  the  little  remnant  of  national  resist- 
ance. There  is  an  enemy  that  still  exists  to  check  the 
glory  of  these  triumphs.  It  follows  the  conqueror  back 
to  the  very  scene  of  his  ovations ;  it  calls  upon  him  to  take 
notice  that  Europe,  though  silent,  is  yet  indignant ;  it 
shows  him  that  the  sceptre  of  his  victory  is  a  barren 
sceptre;  that  it  shall  confer  neither  joy  nor  honor,  but 
shall  molder  to  dry  ashes  in  his  grasp.  In  the  midst  of 
his  exultation,  it  pierces  his  ear  with  the  cry  of  injured 
justice;  it  denounces  against  him  the  indignation  of  an 
enlightened  and  civilized  age;  it  turns  to  bitterness  the 
cup  of  his  rejoicing,  and  wounds  him  with  the  sting  which 
belongs  to  the  consciousness  of  having  outraged  the 
opinion  of  mankind. 

Later  on  he  describes  in  vivid  language  and 
glowing  admiration  the  splendid  resistance  of  the 
Greeks  to  the  powerful  hordes  of  Turkey.  But  as 
we  follow  his  words  to-day  it  is  pictures  of  Belgium 
and  Serbia  that  rise  before  us  and  intrude  them- 
selves into  our  consciousness.  Then  he  returns  to 
the  question.  What  good  will  it  do  to  protest? 

It  may  now  be  asked,  perhaps,  whether  the  expressioil 
of  our  own  sympathy,  and  that  of  the  country,  may  do 


252  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

them  good?  I  hope  it  may.  It  may  give  them  courage 
and  spirit,  it  may  assure  them  of  pubHc  regard,  teach 
them  that  they  are  not  wholly  forgotten  by  the  civilized 
world,  and  inspire  them  with  constancy  in  the  pursuit 
of  their  great  end.  At  any  rate,  Sir,  it  appears  to  me 
that  the  measure  which  I  have  proposed  is  due  to  our  own 
character  and  called  for  by  our  own  duty.  When  we  shall 
have  discharged  that  duty  we  may  leave  the  rest  to  the 
disposition  of  Providence. 


II 

THE   CONTRAST 

Nearly  one  hundred  years  have  gone  by  since 
the  days  of  Monroe  and  Webster — since  they  ut- 
tered their  protests  to  the  most  powerfid  nations 
of  Europe.    The  policy  of  our  nation  has  changed ! 

In  1821  we  were  a  homogeneous  nation  imbued 
with  common  ideals  and  political  beliefs,  and  with 
a  uniform  sentiment  of  American  nationality.  Ra- 
cially we  were  a  unity.  To-day  we  are  a  polyglot 
nation  speaking  many  tongues.  We  have  lost  the 
homogeneity  of  a  single  race.  The  people  of  many 
nations,  each  with  different  political  traditions,  af- 
filiations, and  sentiments,  have  been  cast  into  the 
melting  pot,  and  as  yet  a  single  national  conscience 
has  not  been  evolved. 

It  is  only  to  be  expected,  therefore,  that  follow- 
ing the  great  invasion  by  immigration  of  all  the 
peoples  of  the  world  to  this  country,  our  common 
national  conscience  should  have  become  disinte- 
grated.   New  forces  have  come  into  play  to  which 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  253 

our  early  national  ideals  have  yielded  themselves. 
Americans,  apparently,  have  thought  it  wise  to  com- 
promise with  these  forces.  These  facts  may  explain 
the  change  that  has  taken  place  in  our  national  at- 
titude and  policy  toward  certain  foreign  questions. 
Whether  or  not  they  justify  it  must  be  left  to  the 
judgment  of  each  individual. 

Though  the  policy  of  the  nation  has  changed,  yet 
history  in  many  respects  is  repeating  itself.  Two 
powerful  empires  of  central  Europe  have  overrid- 
den the  rights  of  two  little  States.  In  the  one  case, 
Serbia;  by  a  preconcerted  arrangement  they  de- 
manded the  right  to  overrule  the  sovereignty  of 
that  State  and  dictate  the  administration  of  its  in- 
ternal affairs.  Indeed,  there  is  every  reason  to  be- 
lieve, on  the  basis  of  historical  evidence  come  to 
light,  that  these  powers  conspired  to  extend  their 
empires  over  this  and  other  small  Balkan  States  to 
the  iEgean  Sea. 

In  the  other  case,  Belgium,  one  of  these  empires, 
not  only  disregarded  the  accepted  morality  of  in- 
ternational law,  treated  a  treaty  as  a  "scrap  of 
paper,"  but  by  military  force  invaded  that  peace- 
ful neutral  State  which  had  given  no  offense  what- 
ever— "hacked  its  way  through."  There  was  no 
question  that  a  "wrong"  was  done,  for  it  was  ad- 
mitted officially  by  the  Chancellor.  The  other  na- 
tions of  the  world,  therefore,  did  not  have  to  wait 
for  evidence  to  see  on  which  side  the  wrong  lay. 

In  both  cases  atrocities  were  committed  compar- 
able in  every  way  to  those  which  the  Turks  had 


254  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

committed  in  1821-1823,  and  which  in  a  large  meas- 
ure led  to  the  moral  stand  taken  by  our  Govern- 
ment in  1823.  Indeed,  the  Turks  are  now  commit- 
ting equal  atrocities  against  the  Armenians,  appar- 
ently with  the  moral  support  of  the  Central  Em- 
pires, just  as  the  atrocities  against  the  Greeks  in 
their  revolution  were  supported  by  the  Holy  Al- 
liance. In  truth  German  publicists  have  resented 
any  interference  by  outside  nations,  claiming  the 
Turks  are  within  their  rights  in  taking  any  effective 
measures  against  the  Armenians. 

The  contrast  between  the  policy  of  our  Govern- 
ment in  1823  and  that  of  1914  is  sharply  drawn. 
In  1823,  though  a  young  and  weak  nation,  the 
Administration  did  not  hesitate  to  take  a  definite 
stand  in  opposition  to  the  most  powerful  Govern- 
ments of  Europe,  and  officially  extend  the  sympa- 
thy of  the  nation  and  its  moral  support  to  an  op- 
pressed people.  This  sympathetic  interest  was  not 
confined  to  the  Administration,  but  found  collec- 
tive expression  in  public  meetings  throughout  the 
nation,  through  organized  associations  and  other 
ways. 

In  1914  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
grown  to  be  not  only  the  most  powerful  of  the  neu- 
tral nations  in  this  war,  but  one  of  the  most  power- 
ful of  all  the  nations  of  the  world,  maintained  stud- 
ied reticence  and  almost  ostentatiously  adhered  to 
neutrality  of  sentiment.  Even  in  the  Congress, 
where  one  would  have  thought  differences  of  opin- 
ion would  have  found  expression,  no  one  felt  called 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  255 

upon  to  take  a  different  view.  The  President  had 
admonished  the  people  to  be  "neutral  in  thought 
and  speech."  But  there  was  and  could  be  no  neu- 
trality seeing  that  each  individual  had  his  own  moral 
conscience  in  his  own  keeping.  It  was  different 
with  the  official  conscience  of  the  nation,  which  was 
in  the  keeping  of  the  President,  and  he  held  it  safely 
under  lock  and  key;  or,  to  express  it  slightly  dif- 
ferently, he  closed  the  lid  of  the  box  upon  it  and  sat 
on  the  lid.  Congress,  perhaps,  might  have  forced 
the  President  off  his  seat  on  the  lid  by  taking  ac- 
tion in  the  form  of  a  sympathetic  protest  against 
the  invasion  of  Belgium  and  the  German  campaign 
of  f rightfulness,  just  as  Monroe  and  Webster  had 
protested  in  1823.  But  Congress  was  pliant  and 
timid,  and  official  neutrality  of  thought  and  speech 
was  maintained. 

In  the  country  at  large,  though  the  press  and  the 
great  majority  of  citizens  in  a  whole-hearted  way 
warmlj^  espoused  the  side  of  the  oppressed  nations, 
the  sentiment  was  not  mobilized  by  public  meet- 
ings and  organized  bodies  and  other  ways  into  col- 
lective expression.  It  was,  therefore,  pragmatically 
valueless.  It  was  the  sentiment  of  Americans,  and 
had  not  become  American  sentiment.  It  is  only  the 
mobilized  or  official  sentiment  that  counts  in  in- 
ternational relations.  There  were  none,  indeed,  to 
lead  in  the  mobilization  of  public  opinion  into  a 
concrete  force.  And  though  many  and  influential 
citizens  expressed  through  letters  to  the  press  and 
public  addresses  the  sentiment  of  the  country,  with 


256  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

a  few  notable  exceptions  there  was  a  general  silent 
acquiescence  in  the  official  attitude  adopted  by  the 
Administration — in  the  principle  of  official  Gov- 
ernmental silence.  But  this  acquiescence  did  not 
wholly  mean  agreement  or  final  acceptance.  There 
was  a  large  quota  of  Americans  who  believed  and 
still  believe  that  our  Government  should  have  pro- 
tested in  1914  as  in  1823. 

Nevertheless,  though  history  is  repeating  itself, 
one  thing  stands  out  very  clearly,  and  that  is  that 
the  American  nation  and  Government  no  longer 
feels  called  upon  to  give  expression  to  any  opinion 
or  sentiment  that  we  may  entertain  upon  the  great 
moral  and  political  principles  involved  in  interna-^ 
tional  affairs.  Nor  does  our  Government  any 
longer  consider  that  the  "interest"  of  America  is 
involved  in  the  possible  eventual  supremacy  of  prin- 
ciples of  government  absolutely  hostile  to  our  own. 
Here,  indeed,  is  a  great  change  since  1823. 

Objection  may  be  raised  to  contrasting  the  Amer- 
ican policy  of  1914-1915  with  that  of  1823  on  the 
ground  that  conditions  and  the  questions  involved 
in  the  former  period  were  very  different  from  those 
of  to-day.  But  this  is  to  take  a  very  narrow  view. 
It  is  to  mistake  a  particular  policy  of  a  nation  for 
the  principles  by  which  the  policy  is  actuated.  The 
interference  of  the  Allied  Monarchies  of  1821  with 
constitutional  government  wherever  established  was 
only  a  particular  application  of  their  principles  and 
a  matter  of  expediency.  This  Webster  well  pointed 
out  in  the  case  of  the  Greek  revolution.     It  was 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  257 

when  they  attempted  to  mipose  their  principles  and 
their  pohtical  doctrines  on  the  rest  of  the  world 
that  we  took  issue  with  their  application.  And  like- 
wise we  may  protest  against  the  imposition  of  the 
principles  of  the  present  Dual  Alliance  upon  the 
rest  of  the  world  if  we  feel  called  upon  to  do  so. 

Regardless  of  political  policy,  the  principles  of 
the  Holy  Alliance  were  notoriously  so  opposed  to 
those  of  our  institutions  that  Monroe  in  his  now 
famous  message  warned  those  nations  not  to  at- 
tempt to  establish  their  system  of  government  on 
this  continent.  Their  principles,  aside  from  any 
particular  mode  by  which  they  were  put  into  prac- 
tice, were  entirely  opposed  to  the  rights  of  man- 
kind, to  the  principles  of  democracy,  to  the  rights 
of  other  nations,  to  humanitarianism,  to  govern- 
ment by  the  people. 

Likewise,  looked  at  in  this  broad  way,  it  is  gen- 
erally conceded  that  the  principles  on  which  the 
German  empire  is  governed  and  the  doctrines  which 
publicly  have  been  avowed  by  that  nation,  by  its 
publicists,  its  writers,  its  scholars,  its  press,  its 
statesmen,  its  military  men,  and  its  Emperor,  are 
as  equally  hostile  to  these  other  principles,  and 
therefore  to  American  institutions. 

So  much  has  been  written  on  this  matter,  and 
the  large  mass  of  data  accumulated  substantiat- 
ing this  view  is  so  readily  accessible,  that  it  would 
be  reiteration  or  useless  to  go  over  it  again  here. 
It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the  principles  and  doc- 
trines of  "Might  Makes  Right,"  ''World  Empire 


258  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

or  Downfall,"  "The  Morality  of  War,"  "the  duty 
of  a  strong  nation  to  wage  war  and  to  extend  do- 
minion over  weaker  nations,"  "the  duty  to  extend 
German  Kultur  over  the  whole  world";  "the  prin- 
ciple of  a  chosen  people,"  of  govermnent  by  an  au- 
tocratic class,  and  that  of  the  "Divine  Right"  to 
rule,  the  denial  of  representative  government  ex- 
cept in  name ;  the  principle  of  militarism  by  v/hich  a 
military  caste  is  elevated  to  a  position  of  privilege, 
and  by  which  not  only  the  democracy  of  the  Ger- 
man nation  but  the  world  is  to  be  crushed  if  it  does 
not  yield  to  German  ambition;  the  principles  of 
rule  based  on  armed  force,  of  lese-majeste,  of  the 
denial  of  freedom  of  the  press  and  of  speech,  of  the 
right  to  wage  war  by  the  principle  of  frightfulness 
without  regard  to  international  law,  not  to  speak 
of  much  else — these  principles  and  doctrines  are 
wholly  hostile  to  those  principles  upon  which  our 
Government  is  founded.  This  is  only  a  statement 
of  fact  which  the  most  neutral  and  indifferent  per- 
son may  state  wdthout  any  committal  of  opinion  as 
to  the  merits  of  the  two  systems  of  government. 
The  difference  between  the  two  sets  of  principles, 
or  national  ideals,  is  the  difference  not  simply  be- 
tween democracy  and  autocracy,  but  autocracy  of 
a  kind  so  unique  in  principle,  so  barbaric  in  meth- 
ods, that  it  can  scarcely  be  summarized  in  the  few 
lines  I  have  used.  The  Belgian  and  Serbian  in- 
vasions, the  general  methods  of  warfare,  and  the 
planning  for  and  the  instigation  of  this  war  are 
only  special  applications  of  these  principles,  and  it 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  259 

is  to  these  applications  that  the  question  relates. 

If  all  this  is  admitted,  then  it  follows  that  the  sit- 
uation in  1823  was  not  fundamentally  different 
from  what  it  is  in  1915.  And,  as  with  the  Holy 
Alliance,  when  the  Dual  Alliance  attempts  to  ap- 
ply its  principles  and  its  political  doctrines  to  the 
rest  of  the  world  we  have  a  right,  at  least,  to  take 
issue  with  their  application. 

In  this  presentation  of  the  American  ideal  of 
1823,  and  in  contrasting  with  it  the  policy  and  at- 
titude of  our  Government  in  1915,  we  can  see  to 
what  an  extent  that  ideal  has  become  disintegrated. 
By  the  contrast  we  can  see  how  far  we  have  trav- 
eled since  1823.  It  is  obvious  that  in  1914-1915  we 
have  made  a  complete  somersault  in  our  policy. 

The  ideal  of  1823  may  still  persist  in  the  older 
Eastern  communities  of  the  nation,  but  events  have 
shown  that  even  here  it  has  ceased  to  be  an  all- abid- 
ing, inspiring  creed.  Nor  does  it  permeate  the  na- 
tional consciousness  as  a  whole.  The  indifference 
and  apathy  of  public  opinion  in  the  country  at 
large,  particularly  in  the  West,  grown  up  without 
traditions,  show  that  so  far  as  this  ideal  still  sur- 
vives it  is  no  longer  a  living,  vital  force  in  our  na- 
tional political  thought  and  a  trait  of  the  national 
personality.  Rather  it  has  degenerated  into  an  aca- 
demic opinion  deprived  of  the  vitality  that  springs 
from  intensity  of  interest.  It  is  difficult  to  formu- 
late the  nature  of  the  change,  but,  psychologically 
speaking,  its  emotional  interest  has  been  displaced 
and  attached  to  material  and  local  affairs.    Consid- 


260  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

erations  of  self-interest,  self -development,  self-ag- 
grandizement, self-concern,  and  self-safety  have 
absorbed  the  interest.  As  defenders  of  humanitari- 
anism  have  we  not  become  a  "slob"  nation?  Sym- 
pathy with  suffering?  Yes,  in  plenty.  But  na- 
tional political  resentment  at  the  cause  of  the  suf- 
fering— no.  It  is  noteworthy  that  not  a  single 
leader  has  come  forward  to  mobilize  in  practical 
form  into  an  organized  force  such  resentment  as 
exists.  Blase  to  humanitarian  appeals,  to  political 
oppression,  barbarities,  and  injustice,  we  are  con- 
tent to  follow  along  "the  easier  way"  and  justify 
to  ourselves  our  course  by  the  fact  that  the  national 
conscience  is  no  longer  a  unity.  And  so  those  con- 
siderations— "a  sense  of  our  own  duty,  our  char- 
acter and  our  own  interest" — ^which  in  the  former 
period  determined  us  to  express  boldly  our  opinion 
without  fear  of  consequences  and  in  defiance  of  the 
allied  nations  of  that  time,  no  longer  have  weight 
and  no  longer  govern  the  thought  of  the  nation. 

And  yet  when  we  think  of  this  radical  departure 
we  cannot  help  recalling  that  in  1823,  a  small  and 
weak  nation  that  we  were,  the  great  monarchies  of 
Europe  cared  little  for  our  opinions — for  either  our 
moral  support  or  our  moral  reprobation — but  they 
had  a  high  respect  for  what  militarj^  action  we 
might  take.  In  1914,  when  we  had  become  a  large 
and  powerful  nation,  those  same  monarchies  or 
their  successors  had  a  high  respect  for  our  opinions 
and  little  or  none  for  our  military  effectiveness. 
The  potentiality  of  our  moral   support,   a  force 


The  Disintegration  of  an  Ideal  261 

which  issues  only  from  character,  self-respect,  high 
ideals,  and  assertion  of  convictions  steadfastly  held 
— what  Bismarck  so  highly  valued  as  the  "impon- 
derables"— was  sought  by  every  nation  engaged  in 
this  conflict. 

In  1823  we  spoke  out  without  any  hope  that  our 
moral  support  would  do  any  material  good,  but 
nevertheless  we  spoke  because  it  might  give  "cour- 
age and  spirit"  to  the  oppressed  and  because  we 
owed  it  as  a  duty  to  ourselves  and  our  character. 
That  duty  done,  we  could  leave  "the  rest  to  the  dis- 
position of  Providence."  It  was  one  of  the  most 
noble  acts  in  our  history. 

To-day,  when  the  early  expression  of  our  opinion 
in  condemning  the  violation  of  a  small  and  helpless 
nation,  the  violation  of  the  rules  of  civilized  war- 
fare and  international  law  by  every  sort  of  atrocity, 
and  the  barbarous  treatment  of  civil  populations 
might  have  done  some  material  good  in  mitigating 
the  horrors  of  war,  we  refused,  like  Holland,  Den- 
mark, and  Sweden,  and  other  small  nations,  from 
timidity  to  speak.  We  do  not  consider  that  we  owe 
it  to  the  oppressed  to  inspire  them,  if  we  could,  with 
"courage  and  spirit,"  nor  that  we  owe  it  to  our- 
selves, to  our  character,  to  assert  our  convictions. 

And  yet  again,  as  we  look  back  to  the  times  of 
1823,  there  can  be  no  one  who  does  not  thrill  with 
pride  when  he  reads  the  noble  protest  of  our  little 
nation  of  that  time.  Is  there  any  one  who  is  not 
glad  that  our  predecessors  took  the  stand  that  they 
did  and  spoke  the  words  that  expressed  the  con- 


262  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

science  of  the  nation  and  brought  cheer  to  the 
hearts  of  the  oppressed?  Is  there  any  one  who  is 
not  glad  that  our  country  condemned  the  brutal 
application  of  principles  utterly  hostile  to  those 
upon  which  our  Republic  is  founded  and  which  vio- 
lated the  rights  of  the  Little  Peoples?  Is  there  any 
American  who  is  not  proud  of  the  Administration 
of  Monroe?  Looking  forward  into  the  future  we 
are  forced  to  ask  ourselves  whether  we  shall  be 
again  regarded  in  the  world  of  nations  with  that 
respect  for  our  character  which  we  had  attained  as 
the  exponent  of  humanitarian  ideals ;  whether  that 
moral  greatness  of  our  country  which  once  was 
ours,  and  because  of  which  our  sympathy  was 
sought,  shall  not  have  vanished.  When  we  lose  our 
character  we  lose  our  force  as  an  "imponderable" 
to  uplift  the  violated  nations  from  the  miseries  of 
injustice,  of  oppression,  and  of  war.  As  an  impon- 
derable force  in  the  world  the  nation  once  was 
mighty  for  good. 

It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  our  timidity,  our 
fear  to  follow  the  path  which  Monroe  and  Webster 
boldly  took,  has  not  weakened  our  character  as  a 
nation  and  will  not  earn  the  reprobation  of  those 
who  come  after  us.  Will  the  generations  that  are 
to  come  look  back  to  1914-15  with  that  pride  with 
which  we  to-day  look  back  to  the  Administration 
of  1823? 


THE  WAK— A  TEST  OF  THE  GERMAN 
THEORY  OF  MILITARISM 


A  PAPER  PRESENTED  AT  THE  CONFERENCE  ON  THE 
PROBLEMS  AND  LESSONS  OF  THE  WAR"  HELD  AT  CLARK 
UNIVERSITY,  DECEMBER,  1915. 


THE  WAR— A  TEST  OF  THE  GERMAN 
THEORY  OF  MILITARISM 

THE  term  "militarism"  has  different  mean- 
ings for  different  people.  With  some  its 
signification  relates  merely  to  the  size  of 
the  army  and  navy  maintained  by  a  nation ; 
with  others  to  the  motives,  attitude  of  mind  and  po- 
litical policies  which  are  behind  the  military  estab- 
lishments, and  the  purposes  for  which  they  are  to 
be  employed.  So  that  in  this  view  one  nation  might 
maintain  a  very  small  military  force  and  yet  its 
Government  rest  upon  and  be  actuated  by  "mili- 
tarism"; while  another,  the  United  States,  for  ex- 
ample, or  Great  Britain,  might  maintain  a  very 
great  military  or  naval  establishment  without  ex- 
hibiting militarism.  We  must  not  confuse  mili- 
tarism, understood  in  this  sense,  with  the  American 
idea  of  "preparedness"  against  war — a  policy  of 
national  defense  which  is  now  in  the  public  mind 
in  this  country.  The  two  have  nothing  in  common 
excepting  that  they  make  use  of  military  organi- 
zation as  a  means  to  an  end.  It  is  the  difference 
in  the  ends  sought  that  distinguishes  the  two. 

However  militarism  in  general  be  defined,  our 
thesis  requires  only  that  we  deal  with  the  Geraian 
theory  of  militarism.  There  is  a  very  general  con- 
sensus of  opinion  throughout  the  world,  outside, 

265 


266  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

of  course,  of  the  Geraian  Empire,  as  to  the  char- 
acter of  German  militarism  and  the  purposes  which 
it  has  been  meant  to  subserve.  I  believe  I  am  right 
in  saying  that  it  is  commonly  agreed  that  the  fun- 
damental principle  of  German  militarism  is  that 
the  stability,  power,  and  will  of  the  nation  rest  on 
armed  force ;  and  therefore  that  it  is  to  such  armed 
force  that  the  Imperial  Government  looks  both  to 
maintain  itself  within  the  empire  and  to  enforce  its 
will,  its  "Kultur,"  its  ideals,  and  its  policies  upon 
other  nations  without  the  empire. 

More  concretely  and  concisely,  German  milita- 
rism in  its  external  relations  may  be  defined  as  the 
idea  of  extending  the  nation's  trade  and  system  of 
government  by  force.  It  would  be  easy  to  cite 
from  numerous  authorities  to  support  this  inter- 
pretation of  German  militarism. 

Militarism  thus  becomes  something  much  more 
than  a  system  of  defense  against  encroachments 
from  within  and  without— it  is  a  mode  of,  and  or- 
ganization for,  attack  in  the  enforcement  of  pro- 
gressive policies,  of  national  growth,  and  of  the 
will  of  the  State,  whatever  direction  these  may 
take.  It  has  been  even  the  boast,  not  only  of  the 
German  Emperor  but  of  a  host  of  German  publi- 
cists, that  by  the  potential  power  of  its  army  Ger- 
many has  maintained  peace  itself  between  the  great 
powers  of  Europe  during  the  past  twenty-five 
years. 

With  the  questionable  validity  of  this  claim  I  am 
not  here  concerned,  any  more  than  with  the  proph- 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarism    267 

ecy  of  the  Emperor  in  1902,  when  he  said:  "The 
powerful  German  Army  guarantees  the  peace  of 
Europe."  The  irony  of  Aug.  1,  1914,  makes  such 
claims  tragic.  ]My  only  motive  in  citing  them  is  to 
summarize  the  functions  which  militarism  has  un- 
dertaken to  perform  so  that  when  we  come  to  weigh 
its  claims  with  its  achievements  we  may  judge  it. 

With  militarism  as  a  principle  of  government 
within  the  German  Empire  I  have  nothing  to  do. 
Though  it  may  be  a  system  for  the  enforcement 
of  the  will  of  the  State  against  the  will  of  the  peo- 
ple, if  the  German  people  are  satisfied  with  gov- 
ernment resting  on  the  principle  of  armed  force, 
it  is  their  own  affair  and  concerns  them  alone.  I 
will  content  myself  with  pointing  out  that  that 
principle  necessarily  means  autocracy  based  on 
armed  force,  and  is  utterly  irreconcilable  with  and 
hostile  to  that  other  principle  of  government  which 
rests  upon  the  moral  force  of  public  opinion  con- 
trolled and  checked  by  constitutional  guarantees 
to  the  individual  of  "natural"  and  "inherent"  and 
"inalienable  rights."  And  yet,  if  time  permitted, 
the  thesis  would  be  an  interesting  one  to  defend 
that  even  within  the  German  body  politic  milita- 
rism, like  all  other  human  forces  acting  upon  human 
beings,  is  bound  eventually  to  excite  and  bring 
into  activity  other  forces  antagonistic  to  itself  and 
with  which  it  sooner  or  later  must  come  into  con- 
flict. And  this  has  happened.  The  extraordinary 
growth  of  the  German  democracy,  to  say  nothing 
of  the  numerous  political  parties  that  have  sprung 


268  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

up  in  opposition  to  the  Government,  must  be 
looked  upon  as  the  necessary  reaction  of  human 
wills  to  an  autocratic  will  attempting  to  impose  it- 
self by  force.  However  that  may  be,  it  is  of  the 
theory  of  militarism  applied  to  international  rela- 
tions that  the  present  war  can  alone  be  regarded 
as  a  test,  and  it  is  this  aspect  of  the  theory  that  I 
propose  to  consider. 

We  need  not  concern  ourselves  with  the  origin 
and  historical  evolution  of  German  militarism.  It 
is  sufficient  to  accept  it  as  it  is  found  in  its  final 
form  and  as  it  has  manifested  itself  during  the 
last,  say,  twenty  years — since  1896,  the  date  of 
the  Boer  war. 

The  best  exposition  of  German  militarism  (com- 
monly called  "Prussian")  is  to  be  found  in  concrete 
applications  of  its  principles,  and  no  more  excellent 
example  of  applied  militarism  is  to  be  found  than 
in  the  attitude  of  Germany  in  the  Serbian  crisis  in 
July,  1914.  I  trust  I  may  be  permitted  to  cite 
that  incident  in  spite  of  the  danger  of  introducing 
into  this  discussion  controversial  matters  outside 
the  main  thesis. 

Serbia  had  been  charged  with  being  guilty  of 
offenses  against  Austria.  Germany  accordingly 
gave  Austria  assurances,  secretly,  that  the  latter 
should  have  a  "free  hand"  in  dealing  with  Serbia 
as  she  saw  fit,  regardless  of  the  interests  of  Russia 
or  the  sovereign  rights  of  Serbia,  and  that  Ger- 
many would  back  her  up  with  her  army,  if  neces- 
sary.    To  all  expostulation  on  the  part  both  of 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarism    269 

Serbia  and  the  other  powers  Germany  and  Aus- 
tria turned  a  deaf  ear.  A  settlement  of  Austria's 
demands — all  of  which  were  yielded  but  two  and 
Serbia  offered  to  refer  these  to  The  Hague — by 
mediation,  by  conference  of  the  powers,  by  con- 
versations was  refused.  German  militarism  had 
the  power,  so  it  felt,  to  enforce  its  demands  against 
Serbia,  on  the  one  hand,  and  against  any  outside  in- 
terference by  any  power  or  combination  of  powers, 
on  the  other.  ^lilitarism  desired,  of  course,  to  "lo- 
calize" the  conflict,  for  in  that  case  its  task  would  be 
easy ;  but  if  the  conflict  could  not  be  localized,  mili- 
tarism had  the  power  any  way,  so  it  believed,  and 
was  going  to  gain  its  ends  by  force  and  would  ac- 
cept no  other  methods,  no  matter  what  the  conse- 
quences. Its  ulterior  object,  it  is  generally  con- 
ceded, was  to  extend  German  hegemony  and  trade 
as  an  appanage  of  empire  through  the  Balkans  to 
the  iEgean  Sea,  Constantinople,  and  the  Persian 
Gulf  by  force. 

Militarism  refused  to  take  into  consideration  the 
rights  of  a  sovereign  nation,  the  "natural"  and  "in- 
herent rights"  of  mankind,  the  political  interests 
of  other  European  powers,  racial  sympathies  and 
prejudices,  the  traits,  instincts,  passions,  and  as- 
pirations of  other  peoples,  and,  above  all,  mutual 
international  moral  obligations  by  which  one  na- 
tion should  respect  the  rights  and  interests  of  every 
other.  Its  sole  function  was  to  gain  the  ends  of 
its  own  nation  by  force,  and,  relying  upon  a  sup- 
posed fear  of  its  own  armed  power,  it  refused  until 


270  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

it  was  too  late  every  other  mode  of  settlement.  That 
was  the  method  of  militarism.  Necessarily  mili- 
tarism, to  be  efficient,  requires  a  liighly  developed 
condition  of  preparedness  for  war.  And  this  the 
German  State  has  provided,  first,  in  a  scheme  of 
offensive  and  defensive  alliances;  and,  second,  in  a 
more  efficiently  organized  military  machine  than 
the  world  has  ever  before  seen  and,  for  that  mat- 
ter, than  the  world  ever  dreamed  of  or  thought 
possible.  So  that  if  militarism  when  tested  shall 
be  found  not  to  have  been  a  success,  its  failure 
,  cannot  be  laid  to  inefficiency  of  preparedness. 

At  this  point  the  difference  between  the  Amer- 
ican idea  of  preparedness  and  the  German  idea 
becomes  apparent.  The  American  idea  is  prepar- 
edness for  defense  against  attack. 

The  German  idea  includes  this,  but  adds  to  it 
preparedness  for  defense  of  imperial  intentions  to 
extend  German  trade,  German  thought,  and  a  sys- 
tem of  government  throughout  the  world  by  force 
— world  empire  or  downfall,  it  has  been  called. 

The  underlying  theory  of  militarism  of  course 
has  been  that,  if  all  the  resources  of  a  nation  are 
organized  into  a  military  system  and  that  system 
is  developed  to  its  very  highest  efficiency  in  every 
one  of  its  multiplicity  of  parts,  it  will  be  so  power- 
ful as  to  be  irresistible  against  any  combination  of 
powers  likely  within  human  foresight  to  be  brought 
against  it;  and  that  therefore  no  Power  or  likely 
combination  of  Powers  will  dare  to  attack  it,  on 
the  one  hand,  and,  on  the  other,  it  can  enforce  its 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarism    271 

will  on  the  world. 

As  opposed  to  this  we  have  the  rival  theory  that 
under  modern  conditions  of  civilization,  whatever 
may  have  been  the  case  in  the  ancient  Roman  world, 
no  one  or  two  or  three  States  can  dominate  the 
whole  world  by  force;  that  any  State  that  disre- 
gards the  natural  and  inlierent  rights  of  sovereign 
States  and  fails  to  show  "a  decent  respect  to  the 
opinions  of  mankind"  is  bound  to  awaken  into  ac- 
tivity the  latent  moral  and  physical  forces  of  the 
world;  that  aggressive  actions  threatening  to  ob- 
tain unjust  advantage  by  force  stimulate  resist- 
ance, and  that  sooner  or  later,  under  the  influence 
of  public  opinion,  combinations  of  forces  come  into 
being  which  are  too  powerful  to  be  overcome  by 
any  single  power  or  possible  alliance  of  powers. 

A  perfect  analogy  may  be  found  in  the  great 
political  conflict  which  of  recent  years  agitated  this 
country — the  conflict  between  organized  industries 
and  organized  capital  on  the  one  hand  and  public 
opinion  on  the  other.  Great  aggregations  of  cap- 
ital and  industrial  corporations,  grown  arrogant 
with  power,  undertook  to  extend  their  systems  in 
disregard  of  the  laws  that  protected  the  natural 
and  inherent  rights  of  individuals  and  lesser  or- 
ganizations, and  to  take  what  they  wanted  by  the 
power  which  they  wielded  through  their  mighty 
militant  organizations.  In  the  pursuance  of  this 
policy  there  failed  to  be  shown  "a  decent  respect 
to  the  opinions  of  mankind."  It  was  the  principle 
of  militarism  adopted  by  industrialism  and  applied 


272  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

by  industrial  force.  Such  overriding  of  the  rights 
of  others  necessarily  created  an  uprising  of  public 
opinion  which  gathered  to  itself  the  political  powers 
of  the  nation  and  the  States.  These  were  more 
mighty  than  any  that  industrialism  could  mobilize. 
The  result  was  such  as  might  have  been  expected, 
and  industrial  militarism  was  overthrown. 

As  tested  by  the  results  of  the  conflict,  indus- 
trial militarism  proved  itself  a  failure.  Let  us  see 
how  far  German  State  militarism  has  proved  suc- 
cessful as  tested  by  this  war.  We  are  not  con- 
cerned, of  course,  with  the  moral  aspects  of  the 
question — ^with  such  questions  as  right  and  justice 
— but  only  with  the  pragmatic  question  of  success 
or  failure.  If  militarism  can  point  to  success,  it 
can  at  least  find  one  defense  on  the  ground  of 
necessity  and  expediency. 

Has  German  Militarism  been  successful? 

When  one  thinks  of  the  great  military  successes 
achieved  by  the  German  armies  thus  far  in  this  war, 
of  the  large  regions  of  conquered  territory  in  Bel- 
gium, France,  Russia,  and  Serbia,  one  is  prompted 
offhand  to  answer  in  the  affirmative.  But  deeper 
consideration,  I  think,  shows  this  view  to  be  a  su- 
perficial one.  None  of  the  armies  of  the  great  bel- 
ligerents on  either  side  has  been  destroyed.  They 
all  remain  intact,  and  until  the  armies  have  been 
eliminated  as  effective  forces,  or  their  Governments 
rendered  incapable  by  exhaustion  of  using  them  for 
further  effective  offense  or  resistance,  it  is  idle 
to  talk  of  victory  for  one  side  or  the  other.   Against 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarism    273 

the  occupation  of  territory  by  the  armies  of  the 
Central  Empires  may  be  set  ojft': 

1.  The  complete  failure  of  their  plan  of  cam- 
paign, designed  years  in  advance,  and  to  carry 
out  which  the  German  militaiy  organization  had 
been  perfected.  So  far  from  France  being  crushed 
and  "bled  white"  by  German  preparedness,  the 
German  armies,  after  an  early  retreat,  are  held  in 
their  trenches,  unable  to  move  on  the  west,  and  on 
the  east  apparently  are  incapable  of  further  ad- 
vance. 

2.  The  complete  impotence  of  the  German  Navy, 
the  bottling  up  of  her  merchant  marine,  the  de- 
struction of  her  commerce,  and  consequent  impair- 
ment of  her  industries. 

3.  The  loss  of  all  Germany's  colonies. 

4.  The  encircling  of  Germany  by  an  iron  naval 
and  military  ring  from  which  she  cannot  break  out. 

5.  The  indefinite  isolation  of  Germany  from 
commerce  with  over-sea  nations  and  the  continuous 
paralyzing  of  her  industries  by  England's  navy 
until  England  is  satisfied  with  the  terms  of  peace; 
thus  probably  enabling  England  to  dictate  terms. 

6.  The  possible  restriction,  after  the  war,  of  Ger- 
many's commerce  by  preferential  tariffs,  mercan- 
tile port  restrictions  and  other  measures  on  the 
part  of  England  and  her  colonies,  France  and  Rus- 
sia, against  Germany  and  Austria. 

These  are  offsets  to  the  ten-itories  conquered  by 
Germany  and  Austria.  In  view  of  them  the  final 
possession  of  the  territories  now  held  will  be  de- 


274  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

termined  by  considerations  governing  the  urgency 
or  necessities  for  peace  and  not  by  the  fact  of  tem- 
porary occupancy  by  force.  But,  however  that 
may  be,  after  giving  the  very  maximum  of  weight 
to  the  initial  territorial  gains  justly  to  be  credited 
to  militarism,  including  those  in  Serbia,  let  us  look 
at  the  other  side  of  the  ledger  and  see  what  ma- 
terial and  moral  forces  its  very  successes  have  called 
into  being  to  threaten  its  supremacy. 

By  its  own  very  example,  the  object  lesson  it 
has  given,  it  has  not  only  taught  other  nations  the 
possibilities  of  military  efficiency  but,  as  a  neces- 
sary reaction,  has  directly  excited  them  to  imitate 
the  machine  which  German  Militarism  invented  and 
to  rival  its  standards.     The  results  have  been: 

1.  That  France,  at  first  half  prepared,  has  in 
self-preservation  developed  and  organized  a  mil- 
itary machine  which,  in  proportion  to  its  size,  is 
the  equal  of  Germany's.  For  this  time  was  the  sole 
requisite  and  this  was  gained  when  the  German 
war  machine  was  checked  and  held  immobile  after 
the  first  six  weeks  of  war. 

2.  That  the  English  nation,  hitherto  pursuing  a 
policy  opposed  to  the  maintenance  of  large  military 
land  forces,  has  been  stimulated  to  create  for  the 
purposes  of  this  war  a  great  military,  industrial, 
and  fighting  machine  which  soon  will  be  equal  in 
efficiency  to,  and  approximate  in  numbers  of  men, 
that  of  Germany.  But,  more  important  of  all  from 
the  point  of  view  of  the  validity  of  the  theory  of 
militarism,  there  have  been  evoked,  as  a  reaction 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarism    275 

to  the  threatening  oppression  of  militarism,  a  so- 
lidified British  public  opinion  and  a  national  con- 
sciousness that  not  only  accept  military  prepared- 
ness on  land  as  a  requisite  for  national  security 
against  force,  but  are  inspired  by  a  national  will 
to  destroy  the  militarism  of  German  autocracy. 

3.  We  are  too  far  removed  from  Russia  to  judge 
the  conditions  there  existing,  but  it  is  probably  safe 
to  assume  that  Russia,  with  her  armies  still  intact, 
and  taught  by  reverses,  is  reacting  as  England  and 
France  have  done. 

4.  Even  the  United  States  has  not  remained 
quiescent.  The  thought  of  the  nation  has  reacted 
to  the  object  lesson  of  this  war,  and  public  opin- 
ion, as  a  counterforce,  is  fast  being  mobilized  into 
a  national  will  to  oppose  the  threatening  aggres- 
sions of  militarism  by  a  preparedness  to  meet  the 
attacks  of  organized  force  with  organized  force. 

5.  But  beyond  these  reactions,  resulting  in  the 
mobilization  of  moral  and  physical  forces  against 
militarism,  there  have  been  other  moral  reactions 
of  great  portent.  Without  undertaking  to  pass 
judgment  in  a  discussion  of  this  kind  on  the  rights 
and  wrongs  of  the  cause  for  which  the  belligerents 
of  each  side  are  contending,  the  lamentable  fact 
still  remains  that  the  hatred  and  animosities  that 
have  been  created  in  one  people  for  another  will 
prove  to  be  both  moral  and  industrial  losses  com- 
parable to  the  loss  of  provinces. 

There  is  another  world  condition  which  can  be 
justly  attributed  to  German  Militarism  and  which 


276  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

should  be  taken  into  consideration  in  the  test  of 
its  success  or  failure  as  a  policy  of  government.  I 
refer  to  the  world-wide  hostility  to  and  dislike  of 
Germany  and  her  sj^stem  of  government  which 
now,  it  must  be  acknowledged,  permeates  almost 
all  nations.  Here,  again,  I  wish  to  emphasize  that 
I  am  not  concerned  with  the  rightness  or  wi'ong- 
ness,  the  justice  or  injustice,  of  this  attitude  of 
mind.  I  am  dealing  only  with  the  psychological 
fact  as  determined  by  observation  and  of  common 
acceptance. 

Although  this  world  attitude  of  mind  has  been 
brought  to  a  culmination  by  the  war  and  by  con- 
temporary studies  of  the  German  State  forced  into 
the  focus  of  interest  by  the  problems  raised  by  the 
war,  its  origin  can  be  traced  to  a  succession  of 
events,  or  better  termed,  peAaps,  "crises,"  begin- 
ning at  least  twenty  years  ago.  It  has  therefore 
been  of  gradual  growth.  Let  me  briefly  sketch  its 
histoiy.  We  need  not  go  further  back  than  1896, 
although  it  would  be  a  serious  omission  to  overlook 
the  formation  of  the  Dual  Alliance  in  1879,  made 
into  a  Triple  Alliance  in  1883  by  the  union  of  Italy. 
For  this  alliance  created  a  fear  of  Germany,  and 
as  a  necessaiy  reaction  called  forth  the  dual  Fran- 
co-Russian alliance  in  1891,  to  become  the  Triple 
Entente  in  1904  and  1907  by  "understandings" 
between  England,  France,  and  Russia.  Potential 
force  awakens  distrust  and  creates  preparations  to 
use  counterforce. 

In  1896  the  celebrated  so-called  Kruger  tele- 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarisin    277 

gram  of  the  Kaiser  stirred  the  resentment  of  the 
English  nation,  even  to  the  mobilization  of  her 
fleet,  and  set  the  people  thinking.  Suspicions  of 
Germany's  intentions  became  rife,  and  were  kept 
alive  during  the  next  ten  years  by  Germany's  am- 
bitions to  wrest  the  supremacy  of  the  seas  from 
England;  so  that  in  1908  the  Emperor  felt  con- 
strained to  give  out  his  famous  London  Telegraph 
interv'iew  in  the  hope  to  appease  them.  But  the 
fear  of  German  Militarism  had  taken  deep  root 
in  the  national  consciousness  of  England  and 
haimted  her  statesmen.  Thus  the  germs  of  hos- 
tility to  Gennany  were  planted  in  the  English 
mind. 

In  1897  the  act  of  German  militarism  that  seized 
Kiao-Chau  by  force,  in  disregard  of  the  sovereignty 
of  China,  shocked  the  public  opinion  of  the  world. 

In  1898,  in  Manila  Bay,  the  German  Admiral 
Diederichs  brought  Gennany  to  the  brink  of  war 
with  the  United  States,  and  the  Gennan  Govern- 
ment attempted  to  form  a  European  coalition 
against  the  United  States  for  the  purpose  of  inter- 
vening in  our  war  with  Spain.  Though  Dewey, 
supported  by  British  ships  under  Captain  Chiches- 
ter, thwarted  the  scheme  of  the  German  Admiral, 
and  the  British  Cabinet  blocked  the  designs  of  the 
German  Government,  the  seeds  of  a  public  opinion 
hostile  to  Germany  were  sown  in  the  United  States 
by  these  episodes,  to  germinate  later  in  widespread 
suspicions  of  a  German  design  to  test  the  Monroe 
Doctrine. 


278  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

In  1905  a  diplomatic  controversy  with  Germany 
over  Morocco"  left  France  humiliated  after  the  cap- 
ture of  Algeciras,  with  the  resignation  of  Delcasse 
forced  under  the  threat  of  war  by  Germany;  Ger- 
many gained  a  point  by  militarism,  but  strength- 
ened the  entente  of  France  with  England  against 
a  common  foe.  Thus  in  France  new  seeds  of  hos- 
tility were  sown  by  militarism. 

In  1908  it  was  Russia's  turn,  when  Germany, 
in  disregard  of  both  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  and  the 
Treaty  of  London  in  1871,  compelled  Russia  by 
the  threat  of  the  sword  to  back  down  and  assent 
to  the  annexation  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  by 
Austria.     And  Russia  announced,  "Never  again!" 

Then  in  1911  came  the  crisis  of  Agadir,  when 
Germany  sent  the  Panther  to  that  port  and  threat- 
ened to  interfere  for  the  second  time  by  force  with 
France  in  Morocco,  and  nearly  brought  on  a  Eu- 
ropean war.  Though  the  German  militarism 
backed  down  before  the  power  of  the  combined 
fleets  of  France  and  England,  it  left  increased  feel- 
ings of  hostility  to  Germany  behind. 

And  so,  whatever  be  the  rights  and  the  wrongs 
of  the  successive  controversies  in  these  crises,  there 
has  gradually  been  incubating  for  years  in  the 
world-consciousness  an  attitude  of  mind  hostile  to 
German  militarism,  and  this  has  burst  into  full 
ripeness  under  the  heat  of  resentment  for  wrongs 
committed  against  humanity  and  civilization  dur- 
ing the  present  war.  I  have  passed  over,  of  course, 
a  large  number  of  co-operating  happenings,  such 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarism    279 

as  the  German  Emperor's  appeal  to  Mohanmiedan- 
ism  ill  1898  and  1905,  the  mihtant  naval  program 
of  1897,  the  Venezuelan  episode  in  which  Roose- 
velt thwarted  Gennany's  aggi'ession  against  the 
Monroe  Doctrine  in  1902,  the  Casablanca  affair  in 
1908,  etc.  I  have  selected  only  the  more  critical 
energizing  causes  of  world  hostility. 

In  view  of  these  critical  events,  so  far  from  Ger- 
many having  kept  the  peace  of  Europe  by  the 
power  of  its  anny  during  the  past  twenty-five 
years,  as  has  so  often  been  proclaimed,  she  has, 
besides  robbing  China  of  a  province  in  1897,  nearly 
precipitated  war  by  the  aggressive  actions  of  her 
militarism  on  five  different  occasions:  once  in  1896 
with  England,  twice  with  the  United  States  (in 
1898  and  1902),  twice  with  France,  in  1905  and 
in  1911,  and  once  with  Russia  in  1908.  And  finally, 
by  common  consent,  German  Militarism  incited  the 
world  cataclysm  of  1914. 

It  is  not  given  to  any  one  to  prophesy  the  final 
outcome  of  this  war,  but  we  can  at  least  say  this, 
that,  whatever  it  may  be,  it  is  not  conceivable  that 
the  successes  of  German  militarism  can  be  a  recom- 
pense for  its  moral  and  material  losses,  and  that  it 
will  not  be  left  in  a  relatively  far  weaker  condition 
for  offense  than  before  the  war.  Whatever  may 
be  the  final  result  as  determined  by  the  terms  of 
peace,  German  militarism  at  the  end  of  the  war 
will  not  only  not  have  succeeded  in  gaining  its  long- 
planned  for  ends  of  achieving  its  ambitions  by  force, 
but  will  have  called  into  being  a  combination  of  op- 


280  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

posing  forces  far  more  powerful  than  its  own. 

The  Central  Powers  will  find  themselves  sur- 
rounded by  hostile  powers  not  one  of  which  will  be 
more  exhausted  than  Germany  herself. 

There  will  have  been  created  in  each  of  the  greater 
allied  nations — France,  England,  Russia*  and 
Italy — a  military  organization,  modeled  after  the 
German  pattern,  fully  equipped  and  prepared  and 
coiximanding  all  the  mobilized  industrial  resources 
of  the  nation. 

German  Militarism  will  have  awakened  m  every 
nation,  including  the  United  States,  a  complete 
understanding  of  the  forces  with  which  it  will  have 
to  deal  in  the  future — ^an  understanding  that  was 
previously  lacking — ^and  will  have  created  a  pre- 
paredness by  the  great  powers  against  attack  which 
will  guarantee  that  none  can  be  taken  unawares; 
will  make  another  invasion  impossible,  and  military 
threats  impotent. 

In  other  words,  it  will  have  created  a  world  con- 
dition, probably  with  groups  of  offensive  and  de- 
fensive alliances,  in  view  of  which  no  nation,  and 
no  alliance  of  nations,  can  hope  to  aggressively 
enforce  its  policies  against  a  great  power  by  mil- 
itary force. 

In  other  words,  German  Militarism,  by  its  poten- 
tial 'power  and  aggressive  tactics,  has  called  into 
being,  as  it  was  bound  in  time  to  do,  forces  more 

*  The  sudden  collapse  of  Russia  from  internal  revolution  could  not, 
of  course,  be  foreseen  at  this  time  (December,  1915)  nor  can  we  now 
(January,  1917)  see  what  the  final  fate  of  Russia  is  to  be. 


Test  of  German  Theory  of  Militarism    281 

powerful  than  itself. 

By  the  test  of  this  war,  then,  as  I  view  the  case, 
GeiTnan  Militarism  has  failed  as  a  theory  of  em- 
pire. In  this  failure  have  we  not  the  most  power- 
ful motive  for  an  international  court  to  enforce 
peace  ? 


A  WORLD  CONSCIOUSNESS  AND 
FUTURE  PEACE 


AN  ADDRESS  BEFORE  THE      CONCORDIA  ASSOCIATION 
OF  JAPAN,  AT  TOKYO^  JUNE  13,  1916. 


A  WORLD  CONSCIOUSNESS  AND 
FUTURE  PEACE 


THE   INDIVIDUAL   CONSCIOUSNESS 

THE  newer  Western  psychology  is  giving 
us  a  deeper  insight  into  the  human  mind 
than  was  possible  by  the  older  psychology. 
It  is  laying  bare  the  hidden  yearnings  and 
aspirations  and  strivings  of  human  beings  w'hether 
as  individuals,  or  collectively  as  families,  civic  com- 
munities or  nations.  And  therefore  it  enables  us 
to  discover  the  real,  the  true  motives  which,  under- 
lying the  superficial  motives  and  apparent  motives, 
determine  human  conduct,  whether  that  conduct  be 
an  individual  striving  to  accomplish  his  ambition, 
or  a  nation  striving  for  World  Empire. 

This  newer  Western  psychology  is  teaching  us 
that  the  older  psychology,  the  academic  psychology 
of  the  universities  is,  as  our  great  and  lamented 
William  James  aptly  expressed  it,  but  the  clanging 
of  brass  cymbals — ^much  noise  but  without  real 
meaning.  The  academic  psychology  is  superficial 
in  that  it  does  not  touch  the  profounder  motives 
and  mechanisms  of  human  nature. 

If  we  would  understand  the  human  mind  we  must 

285 


286  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

dive  beneath  the  surface  of  consciousness,  beneath 
the  momentary  ebulhtions  of  thought.  These,  we 
ai*e  learning,  are  but  the  superficial,  phenomenal 
and  momentarily  fragmentary  manifestations  of  a 
larger  and  profounder  consciousness.  The  teach- 
ings of  modern  investigations,  and  of  our  Western 
philosophical  thought  which  those  investigations 
have  stimulated,  is  to  regard  our  conscious  thought 
as  only  a  superficial  consciousness  and  but  a  frag- 
ment of  a  larger  mind  which  we  term  the  subcon- 
scious or  unconscious  mind.  As  an  English  student, 
the  late  Frederick  Myers,  in  his  studies  of  "Human 
Personality"  has  expressed  it,  our  thoughts  and 
impulses  at  any  given  moment  are  but  uprushes 
from  this  larger  reservoir  of  consciousness.  And, 
therefore,  if  we  would  discover  the  motives  and 
springs  to  human  action,  the  components  and  real- 
ities of  human  personalitj'-  we  must  seek  them  by 
exploring  not  the  superficial  consciousness  but  be- 
low its  threshold  in  the  great,  underlying  conscious- 
ness and  primitive  inborn  instincts  of  each  individ- 
ual. In  this  underlying  subconsciousness,  in  this 
larger  mind  we  find  the  solution  of  the  riddle  of 
personality  and,  more  pragmatically  important, 
the  solution  of  the  problems  of  what  we  may  call 
the  collective  consciousness  of  communities. 

By  collective  consciousness  I  mean,  speaking 
generally,  that  unity  of  thought,  tliose  common 
ideals  and  that  common  will  which  take  possession 
of  the  soul  of  a  people — whether  of  small  commu- 
nities or  of  nations.     Just  as  there  is  a  personal 


A   World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace     287 

consciousness  peculiar  to  the  individual  alone,  so 
there  is  a  larger  family  consciousness,  a  community 
consciousness,  a  civic  consciousness  and  a  national 
consciousness  shared  in  common  by  the  members 
of  the  group. 

The  larger  subconscious  mind  can  be  reached  by 
various  devices:  for  instance,  by  putting  ourselves 
in  a  state  of  deep  revery  or  profound  contempla- 
tion— that  is,  abstracted  from  all  awareness  of  the 
immediate  environment.  Then  there  wells  up  a 
wealth  of  images  and  emotions  and  thoughts;  and 
memories  reaching,  perhaps,  far  back  into  the  past, 
and  knowledge  of  the  previously  unknown.  And 
of  all  this  subconscious  knowledge  in  our  ordinary 
state  of  mind  we  were  profoundly  ignorant.  But 
now  we  may  see  translucently,  with  almost  a  su- 
pernatural clearness  and  brightness  of  vision,  what 
before  was  obscure  or  hidden.  Thus  to  my  way  of 
thinking  modern  Western  psychology  and  philos- 
ophy are  reaching  a  point  of  approachment  with 
Eastern  philosophy,  for  it  would  seem  to  me,  that 
it  was  this  same  subconscious  mind  that  Buddha 
probably  reached  by  profound  contemplation.  It 
is  only  a  question  of  interpretation.  Indeed,  some 
Western  thinkers,  like  Frederick  Myers,  would 
bring  this  great  subconscious  mind  into  close  rela- 
tion with  a  transcendental  cosmic  consciousness  of 
which  perhaps  the  individual  consciousness  is  but 
one  focus  of  intensity — a  sort  of  vortex  in  a  uni- 
versal consciousness,  or  the  energy  of  the  Universe. 

But  we  need  not  enter  into  that  larger  meta- 


288  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

physical  question  which  is  far  beyond  my  purpose. 
I  want  rather  to  treat  of  human  personahty  and 
its  ethical  and  pragmatic  bearing  upon  individual 
and  collective  conduct.  What  then  is  the  great 
subconscious  mind  that  plays  so  large  a  part  in 
personality? 

It  is  impossible  for  me  in  such  a  brief  address 
as  this  to  treat  this  great  subject  with  any  fullness 
and  you  will  not  expect  me,  or  indeed  wish  me, 
to  do  so.  I  should  tire  you  if  I  did.  It  is  indeed 
the  great  problem  of  the  future.  As  M.  Bergson, 
the  French  philosopher,  has  recently  said:  "To  ex- 
plore the  most  sacred  depths  of  the  unconscious,  to 
labor  in  what  I  have  just  called  the  subsoil  of  con- 
sciousness, that  will  be  the  principal  task  of  psy- 
chology in  the  century  that  is  opening.  I  do  not 
doubt  that  wonderful  discoveries  await  it  there,  as 
important,  perhaps,  as  have  been  in  the  preceding 
centuries  the  discoveries  of  the  physical  and  natural 
sciences.  That  at  least  is  the  promise  which  I  make 
for  it,  that  is  the  wish  that  in  closing  I  have  for 
it." 

I  shall  little  more  than  touch  upon  it,  sufficiently 
only  to  elucidate  the  main  subject  of  my  addi-ess. 

Personality  as  Evolved  by  the  Creative  Force  of 
the  Experiences  of  Life 

In  this  great  underlying  subsoil  of  consciousness 
are  to  be  found  the  memories  of  a  vast  mass  of  ex- 
periences of  life,  extending,  we  may  almost  say, 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace    289 

from  the  cradle  to  the  grave.  Most  of  them  are 
l)eyoiid  voluntary  recall  as  memory.  By  the  tenn 
"experiences  of  life"  you  must  understand  all  oiu* 
conscious  experiences  of  both  our  outer  and  inner 
life,  our  conscious  experiences  with  the  external 
world  of  men  and  things  about  us  and  oin*  inner 
thoughts — our  soul's  thoughts.  The  subconscious 
thus  includes  the  deposited  experiences  not  only 
of  our  ephemeral  everyday  life,  but  of  our  whole 
acquired  education,  acquired  from  childhood  to  the 
grave — our  pedagogical,  our  social,  our  religious, 
our  ethical,  our  civic,  our  political  and  our  patriotic 
education.  It  includes  eveiything  that  has  come 
to  i,is  by  teaching  from  our  ancestors  and  predeces- 
sors. 

Within  it,  therefore,  are  to  be  found  the  formu- 
lated memories  of  codes  of  right  conduct,  codes  of 
ethical  precepts  and  of  ideals.  These  when  acquired 
in  early  life  may  have  been  repressed  and  lost  sight 
of  by  the  individual  who,  in  later  years,  developed 
in  an  environment  govenied  by  antagonistic  codes 
or  allowed  himself  to  be  governed  by  instinctive 
impulses  and  interests  of  a  conflicting  character. 
But  nevertheless  they  may  still  be  subconsciously 
conserved  ready  to  be  called  again  into  being  by 
favoring  influences. 

A  great  mass  of  such  experiences  we  conceive 
of  as  deposited  as  memories  and  dispositions  to 
behavior,  dispositions  that  may  strive  to  find  ex- 
pression below  the  threshold  of  consciousness  in 
the  subconscious  realm. 


290  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

And  then  among  the  experiences  of  the  inner 
life  must  be  reckoned  the  strivmgs  and  conflicts  of 
the  soul — all  that  pertain  to  the  innermost  sanc- 
tuary of  personality  and  character,  the  intimate 
communings  with  self,  the  doubts  and  fears  and 
scruples  pertaining  to  the  moral,  religious  and  other 
problems  of  life,  and  the  struggles  and  trials  and 
difficulties  which  beset  its  paths;  the  internal  con- 
flicts of  the  soul  with  the  world,  the  flesh  and  the 
devil — conflicts  which  each  individual  may  have 
undergone  in  efforts  to  adapt  himself  to  the  con- 
flicting cii'cumstances  of  his  real  life. 

Memories  of  all  these  inner  experiences,  and  of 
these  and  other  unsolved  problems  of  life  are  de- 
posited in  the  subconscious  mind.  Sometimes  it  hap- 
pens that,  as  in  sudden  religious  conversion,  they 
undergo  subconscious  incubation  or  reasoning  and 
burst  out  into  flower  as  a  sudden  realization  of  a 
religious  truth. 

By  the  creative  force  of  all  these  life's  experi- 
ences cooperating  with  the  inborn  primitive  instincts 
— inborn  in  every  individual — the  subconscious 
mind  is  formed. 

And  out  of  the  subconscious  mind,  as  the  acquired 
experiences  of  life,  and  these  instincts  are  evolved 
and  organized  those  tendencies,  traits,  ideals,  and 
habits  of  mind  and  action  which  we  term  personal- 
ity and  character.  I  would,  indeed,  emphasize  the 
primitive  instincts  because,  besides  all  these  ac- 
quired dispositions  to  behavior,  there  are,  of  course, 
inherited  dispositions,  by  which  we  understand  the 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace     291 

primitive  instinctive  impulses  coming  from  all  the 
inborn  instincts  of  human  nature.  I  mean  the  in- 
stincts of  fear,  and  love,  and  anger,  and  aversion, 
and  the  sexual  life,  and  their  kind  which  motivate 
human  nature. 

The  Subconscious  as  the  Dynamic  Source  of 
Conduct 

But  a  small  fraction  only  of  all  these  subconscious 
memories  emerge  as  conscious  processes  of  thought. 
The  greater  portion  remain  beneath  the  threshold 
and  tend,  unconsciously,  to  shape  and  determine 
our  conscious  processes — our  judgments,  ideals,  be- 
liefs, conventions,  points  of  view,  habits  and  the 
tendencies  of  our  mental  lives.  Whence  these  come, 
how  they  were  born,  we  often  have  long  ceased 
to  remember.  For  they  have  not  only  their  roots 
but  the  springs  which  motivate  them  deep  down 
in  the  subconscious  past.  Indeed  there  is  reason 
to  believe  that  in  profound  thought  it  is  the  sub- 
conscious that  does  the  real  work.  Drawing  upon 
the  deposited  experiences  of  the  past  for  the  con- 
scious needs  of  the  moment,  it  thnists  up  into  con- 
sciousness for  consideration  a  selected  series  of  ger- 
mane ideas.  From  these  our  consciousness  at  such 
moments  does  little  more  tlian  choose  those  judged 
adequate  to  meet  the  conditions  of  the  problem. 

As  I  said  at  the  beginning,  though  we  cannot  by 
conscious  effort  attain  to  all  our  subconscious  knowl- 
edge, yet,  by  special  devices,  like  profound  media- 


292  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

tion,  abstraction,  r every,  etc.,  we  can  bring  a  large 
amount  to  the  full  light  of  consciousness. 

Thus  it  comes  about  that  our  reactions  to  the 
environment,  our  moral  and  social  conduct,  our  sen- 
timents and  feelings,  our  points  of  view  and  atti- 
tudes of  mind — all  that  we  term  character  and  per- 
sonality— are  predetermined  by  mental  experiences 
of  the  past  by  which  they  are  developed,  organized 
and  conserved  in  the  subconscious  mind.  We  react 
with  hatred  or  with  love,  with  loyalty  or  disloyalty, 
with  sympathy  or  with  aversion,  to  the  traits,  or 
character,  or  principles,  or  ideals,  or  behavior  of 
some  other  being,  or  group  of  beings,  or  nation, 
because  in  the  past  there  have  been  incorporated 
in  our  personalities  and  conserved  in  our  subcon- 
scious minds  sentiments,  points  of  view,  ethical  prin- 
ciples, habits  of  mind,  desires,  tendencies,  primitive 
instincts,  etc.,  in  harmony  with  or  antagonistic  to 
them.  We  are  thus  the  offspring  of  our  past  and 
the  past  is  the  present.  It  may  be  that  in  certain 
cases  such  reactions  are,  as  the  newer  psychology 
teaches,  the  outcome,  the  conscious  expression  of 
unrecognized  conflicts  with  subconscious  strivings 
or  self-reproaches,  if  you  like.  But  that  is  a  detail 
of  mechanisms  with  which  we  need  not  concern  our- 
selves here  as  it  does  not  affect  the  fundamental 
principle. 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace    293 

II 

THE  COLLECTI^^  CONSCIOUSNESS 

Thus  far  I  have  been  concerned  with  the  devel- 
opment of  the  consciousness  pecuHar  to  the  indi- 
vidual— his  personality. 

But  an  individual  is  a  unit  in  a  community,  and 
in  the  development  of  his  personality  he  acquires 
systems  of  ideals  and  habits  of  mind  and  actions 
which  are  not  peculiar  to  himself  but  are  common 
to  the  community — i.  e.,  to  a  group  of  individuals 
united  by  common  ties,  and  associations,  and  tra- 
ditions and  interests.  These  systems  may  be  called 
a  collective  consciousness,  because  they  are  possessed 
in  common  by  a  collection  of  individuals.  Hence 
it  is  that  we  have  what  is  commonly  spoken  of  as 
the  social  consciousness.  It  needs  but  a  little 
thought  to  appreciate  that  this  embodies  established 
habits  of  thought  and  ideals  and  sentiments  which 
underlie  the  customs,  manners  and  etiquettes,  the 
habits  and  modes  of  living  peculiar  to  social  groups, 
the  social,  philanthropic  and  other  obligations  of 
one  individual  to  another  and  to  the  body  of  the 
community;  the  accepted  principles  of  social  mor- 
ality. In  recognition  of  such  a  collective  conscious- 
ness and  the  social  conduct  regulated  and  deter- 
mined by  it,  there  has  come  into  being  a  specialized 
field  of  study  known  as  social  psychology. 

As   there    are   many   different    kinds    of   social 


294  The  Creed  of  Deutschtmn 

groups,  and  as  difFerent  groups  become  united  into 
larger  groups  with  common  ties,  so  there  are  many 
different  collective  consciousnesses,  or  community 
consciousnesses. 

Types  of  Collective  Consciousness 

There  is  the  family  consciousness  in  which  are 
embodied,  among  much  else,  ideals  of  affection  and 
loyalty  of  each  member  to  each  of  the  others  and 
to  the  whole  as  a  unit. 

There  used  to  be  the  clan  consciousness  of  feudal 
times.  There  is  the  caste  consciousness,  such  as 
was  that  of  the  samurai  of  Japan,  of  the  Brahmins 
of  India,  the  ancient  noblesse  of  France,  the  knights 
of  the  days  of  King  Arthur  in  England;  and  there 
is  that  of  the  military  caste  of  Germany  to-day, 
and  the  democracy  of  America;  and  so  on. 

More  important  for  us  to-day  from  a  political 
point  of  view  and  of  modern  civilization  is  the  civic 
community  consciousness  common  to  groups  of  in- 
dividuals united  for  purposes  of  commercial,  indus- 
trial and  social  interests  and  orderly  government. 
Thus  the  citizens  of  Tokyo  and  eveiy  city  have 
a  civic  consciousness.  And  still  more  important 
there  is  in  every  nation  a  state  or  national  conscious- 
ness. 

The  Development  of  a  Collective  Consciousness 

Now  the  first  point  that  I  would  like  to  make 
is  that  the  same  principle  underlying  the  devel- 


A  World  Consciousiiess  and  Future  Peace     295 

opnient  of  the  consciousness  peculiar  to  the  indi- 
vidual and  characteristic  of  his  own  personality 
brings  about  the  organization  of  a  collective  con- 
sciousness. But  here  it  is  the  creative  force  of 
common  experiences.  Through  a  common  ethical 
and  social  education,  and,  in  the  case  of  political 
groups,  political  education,  common  habits  of 
thought,  common  sentiments  and  ideals,  common 
aversions,  common  desires,  and  common  habits  of 
action  are  established  and  firmly  conserved  in  the 
consciousness  of  the  members  of  the  group.  Sim- 
ilarly a  common  point  of  view  and  a  common  atti- 
tude of  mind  towards  the  circumstances  of  the  so- 
cial organization  and  of  everyday  life  become  de- 
veloped. And,  most  important,  as  I  shall  presently 
point  out,  things  and  ideas  of  common  experience 
become  possessed  of  a  common  meaning  for  every 
individual. 

Further,  out  of  a  collective  consciousness  by  the 
force  of  common  ideals  and  common  desires,  there 
necessarily  develops  a  unity  of  thought,  and  com- 
mon will  which  impel  towards  uniformity  of  be- 
havior. But  all  is  not  explicitly  conscious.  The 
processes  of  the  mind  and  conduct,  in  losing  their 
plasticity  and  becoming  fixed,  necessarily  become 
largely  matters  of  habit  and  of  second  nature; 
which  means  that  they  have  become  organized  be- 
low the  threshold  of  consciousness  and  have  their 
roots  and  sources  of  energy  in  subconsciously  con- 
served experiences  of  the  past.  Each  one  of  us 
would  find  it  difficult  or  impossible  to  explain  why 


296  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

he  has  the  same  viewpoint  as  the  rest  of  the  com- 
munity, why  the  same  ideals,  the  same  desires,  the 
same  will ;  why  he  regulates  his  conduct  in  the  same 
way  towards  everyday  life.  He  would  give  you 
undoubtedly  an  explanation,  reasons  that  seem 
plausible  to  himself,  but  the  real  reason  is  that  his 
social  and  ethical  education  have  left  dispositions  to 
thought,  dispositions  to  action^ — sort  of  phono- 
graphic records^ — in  his  subconsciousness,  out  of 
which  have  crystallized,  as  a  sort  of  resume,  habit 
reactions.  These  govern  him  in  spite  of  himself, 
even  though  he  struggles  hard  against  their  im- 
pulses. And  this  is  also  in  large  part  the  case  be- 
cause through  education  the  primitive  instinctive 
impulses  of  human  nature  have  been  enlisted  and 
harnessed  to  serve  the  habits  of  the  social  ideals, 
or  brought  under  control  and  repressed  in  accord- 
ance with  the  aims  of  the  community  conscious- 
ness. 

Furthermore  we  see  the  collective  mind  manifest- 
ing the  same  reactions  to  subconscious  processes  as 
does  the  individual  mind.  Thus  we  frequently  see 
the  consciousness  of  a  community  or  nation  react- 
ing to  the  conduct  of  another  community  or  nation 
with  aversion  or  hatred,  just  as  Germany  does 
to-day  towards  England.  The  ostensible  and  given 
reason  is  because  of  some  alleged  immorality  of 
conduct,  like  hypocrisy,  that  shocks  the  common 
ideal.  But  the  real  reason  is  because  of  a  common 
baffled  subconscious  desire,  or  jealousy,  or  fear,  dic- 
tated perhaps  by  self-interest  and  unacknowledged, 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace    297 

to  which  aversion  or  hatred  is  only  the  common 
conscious  reaction. 


A  Common  Meaning  to  Ideals  Essential  to  a  Col- 
lective Consciousness 

The  unity  of  the  collective  mind  depends  in  no 
small  degree  upon  ideas  acquiring  a  common  mean- 
ing  for  all  the  members  of  the  community.  This 
principle  has  far-reaching  consequences.  I  do  not 
refer  to  the  dictionary  meaning,  or  the  etymolog- 
ical meaning,  but  rather  to  the  meaning  which  ideas 
comiote  through  their  associations  and  implications. 
The  meaning  of  the  national  flag  of  every  nation 
is  easily  defined  in  a  dictionary  as  a  piece  of  cloth 
of  a  certain  color  and  design,  but  it  has,  over  and 
above  this,  an  additional  patriotic  meaning  for  all 
the  people  of  that  nation  which  it  has  for  the  people 
of  no  other.  And  the  meaning,  when  it  is  awakened, 
sends  a  thrill  of  emotional  impulses  throbbing 
through  the  veins  which  no  dictionary  meaning 
could  do.  And  likewise  patriotism,  duty,  morality, 
virtue,  ti*uth,  honesty,  valor,  humanity,  culture,  and 
such  ideas  too  often  connote  a  different  meaning  to 
people  of  different  communities  and  different  na- 
tions, as  we  unfortunately  see  exemplified  in  the 
present  war.  And  similarly  ideas  of  relationship 
like  wife,  father,  emperor,  subject,  citizen;  concep- 
tions such  as  God,  religion,  temple,  connote  differ- 
ent meanings  to  different  people,  individually  or 
collectively;  and  so  on.     And  thus  it  is  that  ac- 


298  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

cording  as  ideas  have  a  common  meaning  in  this 
sense,  they  play  a  large  part  in  determining  the 
unity  of  the  social  consciousness,  on  the  one  hand, 
and  variations  in  the  customs,  manners  and  habits 
of  different  communities. 

Let  us  not  forget  that  it  is  one's  own  personal 
experiences  of  life  that  give  that  special  connoted 
meaning  to  ideas  which  is  peculiar  to  each  one  of 
us,  and  therefore  that  shape  your  and  my  points 
of  view  and  attitudes  of  mind  towards  the  life  about 
us.  And  according  as  these  experiences  are  unique 
for  each  of  us  or  are  shared  by  the  other  members 
of  the  community,  will  the  meaning  of  a  given  idea 
and  the  point  of  view  and  attitude  of  mind  be  purely 
personal  or  common  to  a  group  of  individuals  as 
part  of  a  collective  consciousness.  Consider,  for 
example,  the  difference  in  meaning  of  the  word 
"son"  for  you  and  for  me,  according  as  the  context 
shows  it  to  mean  your  son  or  my  son.  Your  son 
means  something  more  and  different  to  you  than 
to  me.  Why?  Because  a  large  number  of  personal 
and  intimate  experiences  have  woven  or  systema- 
tized about  the  idea  many  sentiments  and  memories 
which  give  it  a  peculiarly  personal  meaning  for  you: 
and  correspondingly  in  my  case.  And  so  our  points 
of  view  and  attitudes  of  mind  towards  your  son  and 
my  son  are  different.  But  there  is  also  a  social 
meaning  which  we  share  in  common.  This  is  be- 
cause, besides  those  experiences,  intimate  and  per- 
sonal, peculiar  to  ourselves,  there  are  many  experi- 
ences associated  with  this  idea  of  filial  relationship 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace    299 

which  are  common  to  most  members  of  the  com- 
munity. These  are  derived  from  a  common  social 
education  and  enviromnent.  They  may  be  ideas 
held  in  common  of  paternal  and  filial  duty  and 
obligations  and  affections  and  inheritance,  etc.  In 
this  way  there  emerges  a  collective  meaning  which 
belongs  to  the  collective  consciousness.  The  ex- 
periences which  provide  this  connoted  meaning  is 
called  in  psychological  language  the  "setting"  or 
"apperceptive  mass."  But  there  could  be  no  "set- 
ting" or  "apperceptive  mass"  and  no  persistent  con- 
noted meaning  to  ideas — no  persistent  point  of  view 
— unless  life's  experiences  were  conserved  when  out 
of  mind  as  subconscious  dispositions. 

This  is  one  of  the  principles  according  to  which 
the  points  of  view  and  attitudes  of  mind  and  ideals 
of  different  communities — the  collective  conscious- 
ness of  coimnunities — may  differ  or  be  identical  re- 
garding even  the  fundamentals  of  the  social  organ- 
ization and  conduct.  According  to  differences  in 
the  settings  appear  differences  in  the  ideals  of  the 
collective  consciousness  of  different  communities, 
whether  of  a  circmnscribed  locality  or  a  nation. 
Such  differences  underlie  the  variations  in  the  codes, 
customs,  manners  and  etiquette  of  the  different 
classes  of  society  and  of  nations. 

I  hardly  need  say  that  the  formation  of  a  col- 
lective consciousness  regarding  many  matters  begins 
in  child-life  in  the  home;  regarding  others,  such  as 
political  ideals,  later  in  life  in  the  social  world.  In 
child-life  moral  and  social  ideals  begin  to  be  formed. 


300  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

The  formative  influences  here  are  the  family,  the 
school  and  social  environnient.  The  active  forces 
are  on  the  one  hand  repressive,  and  on  the  other 
creative.  Either  force  may  consciously  or  uncon- 
sciously be  directed  by  the  environment.  Both, 
of  course,  are  in  principle  educational.  I  suppose 
that  in  no  country  does  repression  play  so  dom- 
inant and  large  a  part  as  in  Japan.  By  repression 
the  instinctive  inborn  impulses  and  tendencies  in 
conflict  with  the  ideals  of  the  collective  conscious- 
ness are  inhibited  and  kept  in  check,  and  thus  pre- 
vented from  forming  habits.  On  the  other  hand  by 
the  creative  force  of  education  ideas  are  instilled 
and  systematized  into  a  collective  ideal  that  shall 
be  a  habit  of  thought.  But  from  childhood  and 
even  infancy  the  individual  begins  to  undergo  re- 
pression and  to  accumulate  the  creative  experiences 
that  are  to  form  the  meaning  of  his  ideas  and  estab- 
lish his  points  of  view.  Many  of  these  are  the  basis 
upon  which  manners,  customs  and  etiquette  rest. 
Indeed  he  is  permitted,  or  directly  required,  to  have 
these  experiences  because  they  are  either  the  nec- 
essary resultant  of  the  already  existing  habits  of 
society  or  are  demanded  by  society. 

Is  it  any  wonder  then  that  nations  have  a  dif- 
ficulty in  understanding,  and  therefore  have  a  lack 
of  sympathy  with  the  customs  and  manners  and 
ideals  of  one  another?  Ideas  through  differences 
in  the  apperceptive  mass  come  to  have  a  different 
meaning  for  different  nations.  Even  those  of  fath- 
er, mother,  son,  daughter,  virtue,  morality,  set  in  a 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace    301 

mass  of  different  associated  ideas  of  duties,  obliga- 
tions, etc.,  have  acquired  social  meanings  that  show 
marked  variations  for  each  nation  corresponding 
with  the  social  customs  and  codes  of  each,  such  as 
those  of  marriage  and  inlieritance.  That  which  is 
repressed  by  the  social  consciousness  of  one  peo- 
ple may  be  entirely  neglected  or  encouraged  by 
that  of  another.  In  this  particularly  the  Oriental 
and  Occidental  nations  stand  sharply  contrasted. 
Note,  as  a  simple  example,  nudity  which  is  strongly 
repressed  in  everyday  life  by  Occidentals,  but  is 
disregarded  by  Orientals  so  that  it  becomes  a  com- 
monplace fact  of  daily  life  for  the  child  as  well  as 
adult.  The  result  is  that  while  with  the  former 
nudity  has  a  meaning  that  excites  lively  reactions 
from  its  apperceptive  mass — the  social  root  ideas 
which  have  been  both  its  source  and  the  repressing 
force — with  the  latter  it  arouses  no  more  emotional 
reaction  than  would  pots,  kettles  and  pans.  Like- 
wise exposure  of  the  face  with  Moslems  has  a  mean- 
ing and  causes  reactions  that  belong  to  exposure 
of  other  parts  of  the  body  with  people  having  other 
social  codes.  It  is  impossible,  therefore,  for  one 
nation  to  completely  understand  the  meaning  of 
many  social  ideas  of  another  nation,  and  therefore 
the  corresponding  points  of  view,  without  acquir- 
ing the  same  apperceptive  mass — that  is  to  say, 
without  undergoing  the  same  social  education  from 
childhood  to  adult  life. 

Through  this  same  principle  we  find  the  difficulty 
of  some  nations — nations  that  are  composed  of  poly- 


302  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

glot  people,  racially  and  in  stock  heterogeneous, — 
acquiring  a  national  consciousness  rich  in  common 
ideals.  Such  common  ideals)  as  exist  are,  for  the 
most  part,  instinctive  and  of  the  kind  found  in 
primitive  tribes.  They  may  be  limited  to  defense 
of  the  national  domain  against  encroachments  of 
territory  or  defense  against  military  aggressions 
upon  national  sovereignty  and  national  interests. 
Such,  for  example,  must  be  the  case  of  the  Austrian 
Empire  with  its  polyglot  people — Magyar,  Ger- 
mans, Bohemians,  Roumanians,  Slovenes,  Slovaks, 
Serbs,  Croats,  and  others.  The  same  difficulty  be- 
sets, even  if  in  less  degree,  the  United  States,  with 
its  one  hundred  millions  of  people  drawn  from  every 
race  on  the  globe  and  now  in  the  "melting  pot." 
Out  of  that  melting-pot  will  come  some  day  a  peo- 
ple with  a  national  consciousness,  common  ideals, 
which  will  be  the  spiritual  inspiring  force  of  the 
nation.  The  same  difficulty  may  arise  even  within 
homogeneous  nations,  wherein  the  disintegrating 
influences  of  modern  economic,  individual  and  po- 
litical development  have  created  heterogeneous 
class  divisions  based  upon  demoralizing  social  phi- 
losophy and  selfish  conflicting  interest  to  the  disre- 
gard of  the  interest  of  the  national  whole.  Under 
such  conditions  the  national  consciousness  becomes 
shorn  of  many  of  its  most  spiritual,  amalgamating 
and  inspiring  ideals  that  give  unity  and  force  to  a 
nation.  Among  these  are  ideals  of  personal  self- 
sacrifice  at  the  behest  of  national  duty,  the  obliga- 
tion of  the  individual  to  subordinate  private  rights 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace    303 

and  selfish  interests  to  the  good  of  the  State  and 
the  spiritual  obligation  of  universal  service  in  what- 
ever field  and  wherever  required  by  the  State  for 
its  safety.  In  such  a  situation  of  disintegrated 
ideals  England  awoke  at  the  outbreak  of  this  war, 
and  wondered  with  the  whole  world  at  her  internal 
weakness.  Nations,  like  individuals,  must  some- 
times be  tried  in  adversity  to  find  themselves,  to  re- 
cover their  ideals.  And  so  England  in  the  bap- 
tism of  calamity  has  found  herself,  and  in  the  find- 
ing has  acquired  ideals  that  have  crystallized  the 
soul  of  the  nation  into  a  spiritual  force. 

The  Social  Consciousness  as  the  Regulator  of 
Society 

The  second  point  I  want  to  make  is  that  the  col- 
lective consciousness  of  the  social  organization — ^the 
social  consciousness — plays  a  greater  part  in  gov- 
erning and  regulating  society  than  laws,  or  the 
military  or  police  forces  of  even  the  most  auto- 
cratic government.  And  this  it  does  through  the 
development  of  those  habits  of  mind  and  action 
that  underlie  social  customs  and  of  an  instinctive 
sense  of  social  obligation  which  is  the  foundation 
of  society.  Lord  Haldane,  the  former  British  Min- 
ister of  War,  dwelt  upon  this  fact  in  a  remarkable 
address  just  a  year  before  the  present  war,  and 
pointed  out,  as  I  shall  also  later  argue,  that  it  is 
not  chimerical  to  hope  that  through  the  interna- 
tional extension  of  this  type  of  collective  conscious- 


304  The  Creed  of  Deutschtmn 

ness,  it  may  become  a  common  consciousness  of 
nations — a  world  consciousness.  If  so,  the  duties 
and  obligations  of  one  nation  to  another  may  be 
regulated  by  it,  and  future  wars  prevented. 

He  laid  stress  upon  the  fact  that  the  Germans 
have  a  word  which  he  thought  may  be  used  to  desig- 
nate this  particular  field  of  the  social  consciousness. 
It  is  Sitthchkeit.  The  German  philosopher  Fichte 
has  defined  Sitthchkeit  as  "those  principles  of  con- 
duct which  regulate  people  in  their  relations  to 
each  other  and  therefore  have  become  matters  of 
habit  and  second  nature  at  the  stage  of  culture 
reached,  and  of  which,  therefore,  we  are  not  ex- 
plicitly conscious."  But  Sitthchkeit  implies  moral 
principles  and  it  would  seem  preferable  not  to  at- 
tempt to  define  too  narrowly  those  principles,  and 
therefore  the  kind  of  customs  of  society  which  per- 
form this  function.  The  fact  requiring  emphasis 
is  that  social  customs  become  so  much  matters  of 
habit  that  we  are  not  explicitly  conscious  of  the 
sense  of  social  obligation  and  other  principles  which 
compel  obedience  to  tliem. 

This  field  of  the  social  consciousness  embraces  a 
code  of  social  ethics  and  of  manners  and  customs 
to  which  the  conduct  of  each  member  of  the  com- 
munity must  be  conformed  under  penalty  of  the 
social  tabu.  And  it  embraces  what  we  call  the  social 
conscience  in  which  are  crystallized  the  ideals,  the 
soul  of  the  community.  It  manifests  itself  through 
that  great  and  powerful  arbiter  of  private  and 
community  conduct.  Public  Opinion — the  opinion 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace     305 

of  the  collective  consciousness.  The  code  of  the  so- 
cial consciousness  embodies  or  connotes  duties  and 
obligations  which  each  citizen  owes  to  society  and 
the  common  welfare  and  each  other.  It  embodies 
customs  and  manners  which  respect  the  rights  and 
liberties  and  happiness  which  every  citizen  is  en- 
titled to  enjoy  without  molestation  by  his  fellows. 
It  is  thus  a  system  of  thought  and  customs  based 
upon  common  points  of  view  and  attitudes  of  mind 
towards  community  life,  grown  into  habit,  and 
under  which  social  customs  have  become  established. 
As  the  social  conscience  it  is  the  censor  which  pun- 
ishes with  the  moral  reprobation  of  public  opinion 
infringement  by  the  individual  of  those  customs  and 
of  the  social  codes  which  the  social  conscience  has 
established. 

Out  of  this  ethical  and  social  system  there  de- 
velops a  unity  of  thought  and  a  common  ideal  and 
"common  desire  which  can  be  made  to  penetrate 
the  soul  of  the  people  and  to  take  complete  pos- 
session of  it."*  And  necessarily  there  follows  in 
consequence  of  psychological  laws  a  "general  will 
with  which  the  will  of  the  good  citizen  is  in  ac- 
cord." This  will  of  the  conmiunity  (inspired  by 
the  common  ideal  and  desires)  is  common  to  all 
the  individuals  composing  it.  Herein  lies  the  power 
of  public  opinion  to  which  all  governments  bow  and 
which  all  governments  seek  for  their  own  support. 
Public  opinion  contains  the  potential  common  will 
which  if  not  heeded  will  enforce  the  ideals  of  the 

*  Haldane. 


306  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

social  conscience. 

To  realize  the  truth  of  all  this  we  have  only  to 
examine  our  own  daily  social  habits  and  customs 
and  behavior  in  relation  to  society.  We  then  see, 
although  we  are  not  explicitly  aware  of  it,  that  these 
are  dictated  by  the  social  consciousness  and  not  by 
our  own  personal  desires.  For  if  we  imagine  any 
radical  departure  from  them  we  at  once  feel  within 
us  the  deterring  force  of  social  criticism. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  such  a  collective 
conseiousness,  in  principle,  is  analogous  to  Bushido, 
which  Professor  Nitobe  has  so  charmingly  ex- 
plained to  English  readers  was  "a  code  of  moral 
principles  which  the  knights  were  required  to  ob- 
serve in  the  regulation  of  the  ways  of  their  daily 
life  as  well  as  in  their  vocation."  Only  Bushido  was 
the  collective  consciousness  of  a  caste,  while  "Sitt- 
lichkeit"  is  that  of  a  whole  community  or  state  or 
nation. 

jSTow  it  is  a  commonly  accepted  fact,  as  Lord 
Haldane  pointed  out,  that  the  citizen  is  governed 
in  his  social  conduct  only  to  a  relatively  small  ex- 
tent by  statutory  laws  and  physical  force,  on  the 
one  hand,  and  by  the  dictates  of  his  own  individual 
conscience  and  his  instinctive  desires  and  impulses 
on  the  other.  To  a  much  larger  extent  he  is  gov- 
erned by  the  more  extensive  system  of  the  collective 
consciousness  whether  of  the  civic,  state  or  national 
community.  Even  laws,  in  a  democracy  at  least, 
must  be  the  expression  of  the  comrnunity  conscious- 
ness, that  is  to  say,  of  public  opinion  and  the  com- 


A  World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace     307 

moil  will,  or  else  they  cannot  be  enforced,  and  it 
is  really  this  collective  consciousness  that  is  the  pow- 
er behind  the  law.  And  still  more  is  it  true  that 
the  individual  in  his  everyday  life  is  regulated  and 
governed  not  by  law,  but  by  habits  of  mind  and 
customs  and  codes.  From  the  moment  we  rise  in  the 
morning  to  the  time  we  go  to  bed  at  night  our  social 
behavior  is  governed  not  by  legal  law  but  by  cus- 
toms and  habits.  Nearly  everything  we  do,  even 
the  time  of  getting  up  and  the  time  of  going  to  bed, 
as  well  as  the  kind  of  bed  we  sleep  in — whether 
we  lie  on  the  floor  as  in  Japan  or  on  a  bedstead 
as  in  the  western  world ;  what  shall  we  do  and  what 
we  shall  not  do,  and  the  way  we  shall  do  it;  our 
manners  and  behavior  towards  one  another;  the 
way  we  shall  live,  our  ceremonies  and  our  etiquette ; 
in  short  our  daily  conduct  is  regulated  by  customs 
established  by  the  principles  of  the  social  codes. 
These  become  second  nature,  almost  automatic  and 
instinctive.  The}'^  are,  therefore,  governed  by  sys- 
tems of  mental  dispositions  organized  in  the  mind 
by  the  social  education. 

Indeed,  from  the  very  beginning  of  social  life 
in  the  nursery,  education  consists  in  the  repression 
of  the  barbaric  instincts  with  which  every  child  is 
bom,  bringing  the  savage  impulses  of  his  nature 
under  control  and  adapting  the  child  and  the  man 
to  the  customs  and  ideals  of  the  civilization  to  which 
he  belongs:  in  other  words,  to  developing  in  him 
the  community  consciousness  with  its  habits  of  mind 
and  behavior. 


308  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

Every  child  is  born  a  savage;  he  only  acquires 
culture  and  the  common  ideals  and  the  cominon  will 
of  the  social  conscience. 

The  collective  consciousness,  then,  is  the  founda- 
tion of  the  social  organization;  without  it  the  or- 
ganization would  fall  to  pieces.  If  this  be  so,  is  it 
not  because  of  the  lack  of  an  international  collective 
consciousness,  one  of  ethical  codes  and  possessed  in 
common  by  all  the  great  peoples  of  the  world^ — a 
world  consciousness^ — that  the  world  to-day  has 
fallen  to  pieces  in  this  holocaust  of  war? 

A  World  Consciousness 

What  hope  does  psychology  hold  out  to  civiliza- 
tion? The  common  ideals  of  a  collective  conscious- 
ness respect  and  protect  the  rights  of  individuals 
and  regulate  their  relations  to  one  another  within 
the  nation.  May  it  not  be  that,  with  time,  fostered 
by  systematic  worldwide  teaching,  there  may  be  de- 
veloped an  international  consciousness,  or  world 
consciousness  so  far  as  concerns  international  rela- 
tions? And  may  it  not  be  that  the  principles  of 
such  a  consciousness  will  regulate  the  nations  in 
their  relations  to  one  another  to  the  same  extent 
that  the  social  and  national  consciousness  within  a 
single  nation  regulate  the  relations  of  the  people 
to  one  another,  and,  in  the  United  States  to-day, 
the  relations  of  the  sovereign  states  of  the  Amer- 
ican Union  to  one  another?  In  such  a  world  con- 
sciousness there  would  grow  up  common  habits  of 


A   World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace     309 

mind  that  would  become  second  nature- — common 
points  of  view,  common  ideals  of  right  and  wrong 
in  the  dealings  of  one  nation  with  another. 

Likewise  conceptions  of  humanity,  of  liberty  and 
of  the  obligations  of  one  people  to  another  would 
have  a  common  meaning,  which  is  not  the  case  to- 
day. In  a  consciousness  of  this  kind,  among  the 
international  habits  of  thought  would  be  that  of  re- 
specting the  rights  and  interests  of  other  nations 
whether  large  countries  like  China  or  small  ones 
like  Serbia,  and  the  habit  of  repressing  desires 
which  have  for  an  object  the  selfish  aggrandizement 
of  a  nation  at  the  expense  of  weaker  ones.  Such  a 
world  consciousness  would  mean  desire,  grown  into 
habit  and  customs,  to  respect  the  rights  of  foreign 
peoples  under  international  law,  which,  in  turn, 
would  be  truly  the  expression  of  world  ideals  and 
desires,  not  of  selfish  interests  as  to-day,  and  the 
habit  of  looking  to  arbitration  and  conciliation  to 
compose  the  conflicting  interests  of  nations.  The 
imponderable  force  of  such  a  consciousness  would 
offer  the  strongest  support  to  international  law — 
the  power  behind  the  law — and  out  of  such  ideals 
and  such  desires,  when  established,  there  would  nec- 
essarily develop  a  general  will  to  peace  and  a  will 
to  fulfil  the  obligations  imposed  by  the  ideals. 

Theoretically  the  attainment  of  a  world  con- 
sciousness of  this  kind  is  psychologically  possible, 
and  if  ever  attained  it  would  necessarily  have  the 
same  binding  force  in  regulating  international  con- 
duct as  has  the  social  consciousness  within  a  nation 


310  The  Creed  of  Deutschtum 

to-day.  To  reach  such  an  end  the  old  world-habit 
of  mind — the  habit  of  thinking  in  war  terms,  of 
turning  at  first  thought  to  war  as  a  necessary  means 
of  settling  international  disputes,  must  be  broken. 
A  world  conscience  will  be  the  censor  which,  like 
the  social  censor,  will  threaten  with  the  tabu  a 
breach  of  treaties  of  international  customs,  codes 
and  habits  of  conduct.  The  ideals  of  the  German 
autocracy  and  of  the  German  military  caste  as 
taught,  by  their  philosophers  and  publicists  like 
Treitschke  and  Nietzsche  and  military  writers  like 
Bernhardi  and  their  Kaiser,  such  ideals  as  "Might 
makes  Right,"  "World  Empire  or  Downfall,"  "It 
is  the  duty  of  great  nations  to  make  war  on  weak 
nations,"  "Little  nations  have  no  rights  which  pow- 
erful nations  are  bound  to  respect,"  and  "Nothing 
shall  happen  in  this  Avorld  without  Germany  being 
consulted,"  in  short  "Kultur"  and  the  worship  of 
force,  all  such  militaiy  ideals  must  give  place  to 
the  ideals  of  that  collective  consciousness  of  the 
German  people  that  govern  them  in  their  relations 
to  each  other  within  the  Empire  and  to  a  newly 
created  collective  consciousness  of  the  world.  The 
war  attitude  of  mind  of  the  German  autocracy  and 
military  caste,  which,  like  a  mental  disease,  has  per- 
meated and  taken  possession  of  the  soul  of  the  Ger- 
man people  in  its  attitude  towards  other  nations, 
must  give  place  to  a  world  consciousness. 

If  such  a  world  consciousness  should  be  devel- 
oped, one  nation  will  understand  another  because 
the  ideals  of  the  common  consciousness  will  have 


A   World  Consciousness  and  Future  Peace     311 

the  same  meaning.  We  shall  think  in  the  same  lan- 
guage though  we  do  not  speak  it.  It  is  not  through 
militarism,  nor  by  piling  up  armaments,  nor  by  a 
"league  to  enforce  peaee"  that  a  world,  peace  can 
be  perpetually  maintained.  Such  methods  can  be 
only  temporary.  Nor  in  the  future  when  all  na- 
tions shall  be  equally  armed  to  the  teeth  and  all 
the  peoples  of  all  the  nations  mobilized  into  armies, 
as  wdll  be  the  case  after  this  war,  can  even  just 
aspirations  be  attained  and  international  disputes 
and  conflicts  of  interest  be  settled  by  arms,  be- 
cause there  must  result  a  dead-lock  of  force.  Some 
other  mode  must  be  found.  May  not  these  legiti- 
mate aims  be  reached  without  war  when  the  great 
nations  arrive  at  an  international  consciousness, 
with  common  ideals,  a  common  understanding,  and 
a  common  will.f 

A  world  consciousness  in  international  relations 
— that  is  the  vision  I  see,  the  dream  that  psychol- 
ogy permits  us  to  have.  May  that  dream  come 
time ! 

t  The  thesis  of  such  a  world  consciousness  which  Lord  Haldane  ably 
presented  from  a  legal  standpoint  and  which  I  have  endeavored  to 
develop  along  ps_ychological  lines  necessarily,  of  course,  assumes  the 
cooperation  of  an  international  police  of  some  kind,  just  as  the  social 
consciousness  is  supplemented  by  a  civic  and  national  police.  There 
are  "Apache"  or  bandit  nations  as  there  are  bandits  within  the  social 
organization  of  every  nation,  and  in  the  case  of  revolutions  the  rights 
of  foreign  nationals  must  be  protected  from  mob  violence.